SHYAMA Vs. GODAWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.

(2.) In W.P. No. 2934/13(I) the petitioner has challenged the validity of the order dated 26.02.2013, by which the application preferred by the petitioner u/S. 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been rejected, whereas in W.P. No. 283/14, the petitioner has challenged the validity of the order dated 24.02.2012, by which the application filed by the respondent u/S. 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been allowed.

(3.) Facts giving rise to filing of these petitions, briefly stated, are that respondent/plaintiff in W.P. No. 2934/13 and petitioner/plaintiff in W.P. No. 283/14 had instituted suits against the defendant (Shyama) for seeking compensation for death of their son Gabbar in W.P. No. 2934/13 and Dheeraj in W.P. No. 283/2014. The plaintiffs in both the cases pleaded that the defendant being the owner of the boat was rowing the boat in a negligent manner, despite being aware of the leakage in the boat, due to which it overturned in the river Chambal, as a result of which, sons of plaintiffs died. The intimation about the aforesaid accident was given to the police. Thereupon, crime No. 64/2006 was registered for an offence punishable u/S. 304-A of the Indian Penal Code against the defendant. The plaintiffs in the suits sought compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,00,000/- each. The defendant in both the suits, filed a written statement on 09.05.2008 and denied the averments made in the plaint. It is the stand of the defendent that he did not have any boat as claimed by the plaintiffs.