SHEELA RANI Vs. NIDHAN SINGH
LAWS(P&H)-2006-10-502
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on October 17,2006

SHEELA RANI Appellant
VERSUS
NIDHAN SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

VINOD K.SHARMA, J. - (1.) THIS order will dispose of FAO Nos. 2049, 2050 and 2051 of 2003 as they arise out of the common award dated 12.11.2002 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Patiala.
(2.) SMT . Sheela Rani along with her minor children and mother of the deceased claimants in MACT No. 83 of 23.12.1998 had filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the 'Act') claiming compensation on account of death of her husband-Shri Khraiti Lal in a motor vehicle accident. The case set up by the claimants was that on March 11, 1998 at about 8 a.m. Shri Kharaiti Lal deceased along with the claimant and Budhwanti, claimant in MACT No. 96-T dated 2.11.1999, were going on a scooter bearing No. PBR 5982 from Khamano Mandi to village Haneala, Tehsil Rajpura for attending the bhog ceremony of one Parma Ram. Kanwar Ram and Ramesh Kumar were following them on another scooter No. PB-11-E-2122 and when they reached on the bridge near Lali Dhaba in village Pahar Kalan, one Trala No. HR-38-6785 came from behind which was being driven rashly and negligently by Shri Nidhan Singh and struck against the scooter being driven by Kharaiti Lal. As a result thereof, Kharaiti Lal deceased, Sheela Rani and Budhwanti fell on the road. Left leg of Budhwanti was crushed while Kharaiti Lal and Sheela Rani had received head injuries. The injured were rushed to A.P. Jain Hospital, Patiala. Kharaiti Lal succumbed to his injuries.
(3.) IT was claimed that the accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of Nidhan Singh, driver, respondent No. 1 herein. It was further claimed that Sheela Rani became mentally upset and has also been deprived of love and affection of her husband. It was claimed that she was dependent on the income of Kharaiti Lal. She further claimed that a sum of Rs. 50,000/- was spent by her on her treatment and she was still under treatment. It was also claimed that another sum of Rs. 2 lacs was spent on the treatment of Budhwanti, claimant in MACT No. 96-T dated 2.11.1999.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.