Gopi Nath, J. - (1.) THIS is a first appeal from order of the District Judge, Rampur dated 20 -10 -1973 allowing the Petitioners claim for compensation under Section 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act. The Petitioners were the mother and father of the deceased.
(2.) THE allegation made in the petition was that the deceased was going on a cycle on Bareilly Moradabad road on 25 -3 -1969. He was crushed by the truck No. USL 9058 which dashed against him while he was going on his left on the road. The incident took place at 2 p.m. Two rickshaw walas namely, Nawab Ali (P.W. 4) and Ram Singh (P.W. 5), who were passing on the same road witnessed the incident. A F.I.R. was lodged. The deceased died on the spot. Post -mortem was performed and the body was delivered to the parents. The Petitioners case was that the truck was in high speed. It was being driven on the wrong side of the road. The driver was not able to control the truck. It turned against the deceased and crushed him on the spot. Nawab Ali (P.W. 4) and Ram Singh (P.W. 5) tried to stop the truck but the driver did not stop it and disappeared. A police report was lodged. The Petitioners preferred a claim under Section 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act, for a sum of Rs. 15,000/ - by way of compensation. The claim was originally preferred against one Inayatullah as the owner of the truck and the Northern India General Insurance Co. as the company securing the risk. Later the petition was amended and M/s Gopi Nath Madan Mohan and Awadh Behari were impleaded as the owners of the truck and M/s General Insurance Corporation of India unit: New India Assurance as the insurance company. The amendment was sought after some lapse of time as the Petitioners did not know who the real owners were and they had preferred the claim against Inayatullah as the owner. The amendment was allowed and the present Appellants were impleaded as the owners though at a late stage. An objection was raised before the Tribunal that the amendment was belated and the claim was time barred against the new parties impleaded. The objection was rejected on the ground that good cause had been furnished by the Petitioners for the impleadment of the parties at a late stage. They could be impleaded only when information about their being owners of the vehicle was received by the Petitioners.
(3.) THE Appellants admitted themselves to be the owners of the truck. They pleaded that the petition was barred by time against them and they also denied the negligence of the truck driver in the accident.;