Bedi, J. - (1.) THIS judgment will dispose of all the four appeals Nos. 117, 118, 162 and 163 of 1956, which arise in the following circumstances: Hazari Lal Plaintiff instituted the suit in forma pauperis against the eight Defendants claiming Rs. 20,000/ - as damages for his own benefit and also for the benefit of some other persons. The connected suit also was instituted by Roshan Lal for the recovery of Rs. 11,500/ - against the same Defendants by way of damages. The facts, as disclosed in the plaints, are that on the 4th February 1954 there was a collision between bus No. RJL 2817 and truck No. PNJ 633. The accident took place near the furlong post 72/5 near Ferozepore Jhirka in Gurgaon District. The bus was coming from Alwar towards Delhi while the truck was going to Alwar. It is alleged that on that day Tara Chand Aggarwal, son along with Roshan Lal Plaintiff and Kanta Devi wife of Roshan Lai booked their seats in the above bus from Alwar to Delhi with the Alwar Motor Association Ltd., Alwar, Defendant No. 1, under a common ticket No. 14/96. The bus in question was owned by the Defendant above mentioned and was being driven by Thela Ram Defendant No. 2. It was insured with the General Assurance Society Ltd., Ajmer Defendant No. 7 against injuries to passengers and third party risk. The bus left Alwar at about 9 30 a.m. and collided with the above mentioned truck at about 11 a.m. The truck in question was owned either by Sardar Makhan Singh Defendant No. 3 or by Bawa Harbans Singh Bedi Defendant No. 4, and M/s. Jaipur Golden Transport Delhi, Defendant No. 5, were the carriers who had employed this truck in the course of their business. Puran Singh Defendant No. 6 was the driver of the truck in the employment of the owners and under the direction of the said carriers. The truck was also insured with M/s. Deepak General Insurance Company Ltd., New Delhi, Defendant No. 8, against third party risk. As a result of this collision Tara Chand, Kanta Devi wife of Roshan Lal and their minor daughter Parmila received fatal injuries. Kanta Devi and her minor daughter Parmila Devi died at the spot while Tara Chand died in the hospital soon thereafter. It was alleged that the collision occurred due to the negligence of either of the two drivers or both of them who drove the vehicles on wrong sides, at excessive speed and without giving warning while rounding the curve. They failed to keep proper look out or to apply the brakes and also to exercise due care and skill in the management of the vehicles. Tara Chand deceased was the sole bread winner of his family consisting of his father Hazari Lal Plaintiff, his mother Mrs. Rama Devi, his wife Lajiwanti, his son Radhey Shyam, his daughter Saroj Devi and his another son Bal Ram, aged 2 months. It was alleged that the family was deprived of the benefit of Rs. 200/ - per mensem which Tara Chand deceased was earning. Hazari Lal Plaintiff, father of Tara Chand deceased, therefore, claimed Rs. 20,000/ - as damages for the benefit of himself and the above -mentioned members of the family.
(2.) IN the other suit by Roshan Lal, he claimed Rs. 10,000/ - as damages for the death of his wife Kanta Devi, which deprived him, his two daughters Sharda and Usha, and his two sons Sarvan and Parven, of the benefit they derived from her. Besides Rs. 1,000/ - were claimed as damages for the death of his daughter Parmila Devi. In addition an amount of Rs. 500/ - was claimed for the personal injuries caused to him, the sufferings undergone and the reduction in his physical capacity to enjoy life in future and for the medical expenses incurred etc. Bawa Harbans Singh Bedi, who was mentioned as Defendant No. 4, and is a resident of 29 -C Nizam -ud -Din appeared and stated that he had no concern with the truck in question and that it was Bawa Harbans Singh Bedi son of Bawa Parbodh Singh, Roshanara Road, Delhi, who was at one time the owner of the truck and that the Plaintiff should, therefore, sue him instead. The Plaintiffs realised the mistake and the name of Defendant No. 4 was struck off on the statement of the Plaintiffs counsel made on the 20th May, 1955, and instead the name of Bawa Harbans Singh Bedi son of Bawa Parbodh Singh of Roshanara Road, Delhi, was substituted. Summons were issued in response to which Bawa Harbans Singh Bedi son of Bawa Parbodh Singh appeared in Court and put in his written statement on the 3rd August, 1955. Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 put in their written statements denying the allegations against them. It was denied that the bus driver Thela Ram was negligent or in any way at fault. It was asserted that he was driving the bus at the speed of 25 to 30 miles per hour as was permissible and that he was sounding the horn while taking the turn and even otherwise kept proper look out. He did not apply the brakes as there was no occasion for it and that the speed of the bus at the time of the collision was normal. It was also averred that the truck in question was being driven very rashly and negligently which struck on the back portion of the bus. The alleged loss to the Plaintiffs was also denied, and the earning capacity of Tara Chand deceased was also questioned. Similarly, Defendant No. 3 in his written statement averred that the truck in question neither belonged to him nor to Bawa Harbans Singh, that although his name appeared in the record of the registration authority, but the real owners were S. Nihal Singh, Tej Singh of Alwar -one half, and Jiwan Singh, Prem Singh and Sujan Singh, Sohel Singh of Delhi -one half, and that the collision and the deaths were not due to any kind of negligence on the part of the truck driver, but the fault lay with the driver of the bus, namely, Thela Ram. It was also averred that the vehicles were insured and the liability therefore rested with the insurers. It was denied that the Plaintiffs were entitled to any damages.
(3.) DEFENDANT No. 4 who was subsequently impleaded, asserted in his written statement that the suit in question was time -barred and that he was only a nominal owner of the truck which in fact had been transferred to the name of Makhan Singh before the collision. He, therefore, denied his liability for any damages.;