H.R.Sodhi, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal against an award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Punjab, who on 26th July, 1966, allowed a compensation of Rs. 9,600 under Section 110 -B of the Indian Motor Vehicles Act, to Joginder Singh Respondent against the Appellants. Facts as are necessary for decision of the appeal may be stated as under.
(2.) ON 11th December, 1959, truck No. HIM -1015 driven by Daula Ram, who died during the pendency of the proceedings before the Tribunal, came from Rampur -Bushehr to Surajpur in order to collect some cement. After having loaded the truck, the deceased driver instead of going straight back to Rampur -Bushehr came towards Chandigarh side from the main Ambala -Kalka road when the truck struck against Kaka Singh, aged about 16 years, and another boy Sadhu Singh, aged 7 years, both of whom were going on a cycle in the same direction towards Manimajra. Daula Ram was driving the vehicle at a high speed and did not stop after the accident. The vehicle again collided with another truck No. PNE 8096 at Manimajra. The identity of the truck was established as the occupiers of some other two trucks who came front the side of Manimajra told on enquiry that the accident had taken place with a truck loaded with cement. The injured boys were taken to the General Hospital, Chandigarh, where Kaka Singh succumbed to his injuries while Sadhu Singh recovered after 3 -4 days. Joginder Singh Respondent, father of the deceased Kaka Singh, filed a claim application before the Tribunal on 9th February, 1960, and claimed Rs. 30,000 as compensation for the loss caused to him on account of the death of his son. The claim was made against Himachal Pradesh Government which was admittedly the owner of the truck driven by Daula Ram and involved in the accident. The Government filed a written statement pleading inter alia that it was not liable for the alleged negligence of the driver since the latter had no authority to go towards Chandigarh and the accident did not, therefore, take place when he could be said to be acting for and on behalf of his employer. It was further pleaded that there was no negligence on behalf of the driver. The quantum of compensation claimed by the Respondent was also challenged. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed: 1. Whether the accident was due to the rash and negligent act of the driver of vehicle No. HIM -1015 and, if so, its effect ? 2. Whether the Himachal Government Transport is liable in view of the objection taken up in para 1 of the written statement filed by the Respondent, in case the facts stated therein are proved ? What is the quantum of compensation due, if any, and from whom ?
(3.) RELIEF . 3. The Tribunal dismissed the claim and First Appeal from Order No. 121 of 1962 preferred by Joginder Singh was allowed by Harbans Singh, J., on 18th January, 1966. The order of the Tribunal was set aside holding that the accident did take place with the truck in question due to the rashness and negligence of the driver. Following two additional issues were framed by the learned Judge and the case remanded to the Tribunal: 1. Whether, in the circumstances of the case, the Himachal Pradesh Government is not liable to pay the damages ? and 2. If so, what is the quantum of damages ? 4. After remand, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that Himachal Pradesh Government was liable and the Respondent entitled to a compensation of Rs. 9,600. Hence the present appeal.;