PAWAN Vs. BHULIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the order dated 27-8-2009 passed by MACT, Ratlam, in Claim Case No. 02/2009, whereby the claim petition filed by respondent Nos. 2 to 4 for compensation on account of death of Ambalal @ Amritlal who was husband of respondent No. 1, son of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and father of respondent No. 4 was allowed and compensation of Rs. 3,32,000/- was awarded and the respondent No. 5 was exonerated on the ground that appellant No. 2 who was the driver was not possessing the valid driving licence, the present appeal has been filed. Short facts of the case are that respondent Nos. 1 to 4 filed a claim petition alleging that on 12-9-2004 Ambalal was sleeping in the factory premises, at that time appellant No. 2, who was driver of crane No. HR-38-P-1446 drove the crane rashly and negligently, with the result, Ambalal died. It was alleged that appellant No. 1 is owner and respondent No. 5 is the Insurance Company. The claim petition was contested by respondent No. 5 on various grounds including on the ground that appellant No. 2 was not possessing the valid driving licence. It was prayed that claim petition be dismissed against respondent No. 5. After framing of issues and recording of evidence learned Tribunal allowed the claim petition by awarding compensation of Rs. 3,32,000/- and exonerated respondent No. 5 on the ground that appellant No. 2 was not possessing the valid driving licence, against which the present appeal has been filed.

(2.) Learned Counsel for appellants submits that impugned award whereby respondent No. 5 has been exonerated, is illegal and deserves to be set aside. Along with the appeal an application under Order XLI Rule 27, CPC has been filed along with certificate dated 15-10-2010 issued by the Licensing Authority, Indore, wherein it is stated that crane is a commercial vehicle like a tractor, hence for driving cranes only heavy vehicles licence is required and no other special licence is required for driving the cranes. It is prayed that in the facts and circumstances the application and also the appeal be allowed and the finding whereby respondent No. 5 has been exonerated, be quashed.

(3.) Learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 submits that he has no objection in allowing the appeal and also the application.