IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDIGATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH Misc. Appeal No. /0?/^'of2003 Bivisiinlench Appellaats: Npn applicanta <" Nonapplicant State ofChhattisgarh, through the Collector Ainbikapur District Surguja(CG) 2. Sugerintending Engineer, through Assistant Engineer, Public Health Engineering Departiiient, Irrigation Colony, Ambikapur- Surguja (CG) Res£ondents: & \. <<faimanto R :?.t'fen-applicant No.3 f^ ^' ^•'^. .c'2 -& l"<y Versus Jainandaa, S/o Charicrt Ram, aged about 40 years, ByCasteRajwar, occu^ation j Agriculturist and Labour ' \ • ' 'l- Smt. Leelawati, W/'o Jainandan, ^ged about i 30 years, By Caste Rajwar, occupation house-wife andlabour. _ /•c Vllt-4ofy-<>^n'a"<-i-A-KHAi*'P2"2- , W2-—^ •Sirf^i-^miS>IK^f'"i.^ Al^8-.^AR.4tlTAG''<J ' Ram Manohar Pandey, S/o Shri Ramnaresh Pandey, aged aboyt 57 years, occupation Driver, Public Health Engineering Department Sub Division, Kedarpur, Ambikapur-Surguja (CG) I MEMO OF APPEAL UNDER SECTION173 QE THE MOTOR VJEH!CLESACT1988 fc3' HIOH COURT OF JUDICATURB AT BILASPUR, CHHATTISOARH Misceilaacous Appeal No.1087 cf 2003 Sta-te of CKbattisgarIi and another 'versus - Jaiaandaa and others ORDER FOR CONSIDERATION HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge Sd/- Chief Justicej POST FOR ORDBR ON 24TH JUnB,2004 Sd/- LC.Bhadoo Judge HIGH COURT OP JUDICATUREAT BIV^SPUR, CHHATTtSGARH MtsccUaaeous Appcai No.1087 of 3003 State of.ChIiattisgarfa and another— - Versus .- Jaiilaadaa and others Present:- Mr. U.N.S. Deo, Govt. Advocate: FOY the State/appetlaats. Division Bench: - Hon'ble Mr. A.S.V. aad Hon'ble asr. L.C. j C»iJ* ^_J. Q^S.QKS, (Passedon 24th June, 2004) The^)ltowuig_onler Qf(tieCQj.irt3Vcis_de3wered_b^L^C,_BftaA?Q^J: - 1. AppeUauts 1 aad 2 State of Chliattisgarh and Superiiitenduii Enginccr, Public Hcaltli Enguiccring Dcpat-taient, rcspectivcly, havc preterred ttiis appeal uader Sectiou 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, being aggrieved by Uie award dated 21.8.2003, passed by the Motor Accident Claiuis Tnbuiial, Surguja (Ambikapur), whereby fh.e leamed Tribunal has partiaUy aUowed fhe claim ofrespondents 1 & 2 hcrcin who are thc fathcr aad luotacr of dcccascd Satyanarayaii to the extent of Rs.1,42,000/- assessing tfaeir dependency to tlie tune of Rs.9,000/- per aanuia by applyiag the niultiplier of 15 iacludiag Rs.5,000/- as coiapensatioa on account of deprivation of tbe pleasure of their SOBL and Diental agony and also Rs.2,000/- for funcral expcnscs. 2. Facts hi brief leading to filiag of this appeal iare that on 30£tlMarcli., 2002,,.at about 16:30 hours when deceased Satvaraaavan. aloiis ;^8S( . ~ • ; - '• -.-.-. . . - - -_--_. .^_. - __^__--.^. wifh Jaginohaa and Rajesh Kum.ar were coraiag tp.their vfflage on a bioyclc from Vfflage; Lehpatra, dcccascd Satyaaaraysui was sittiiig in fhe front on the fi~am.e of ftie bicycle, when they reached near a petrol pump of '?ula^; ,.J<ewri, one truck bearmg registration -No.MPZ-8430, cai&e.feom. the opposite direction! i.e. Lakhaiipur 1 iliii- •AR~J viBage side. It is alleged that respoiideat No.3 Ram Manoliar Pondey wlule driving the truclc ia a rash aad negligent luanner, hit thc cvclc fi-oni tfac front side, as a result of wliich aU. thc thrcc bovs along with the cycle feU down aad Sah'aaai^yan received multiple iajuries as Biany as _ten mjuries viz,, multipie bone fractures oa parietal region, niau.dible and chest; liver was ruptured, braia was lacerated aild on accoiint ofthese injuries, he died spontaiieously. Rajesh, who was tiavcUm.g with the dcceascd on thc bicycle as piUion rider, lodged tlie report ui Police Station: Laxhanpur on fhe same day. The PoUce tookup the investigation aiid ultimately, after investigation filed charge sheet agaietst respondent No.3 for fhe coinnussion of offence punishable uilder Sections 279, 337 and .3Q4-AoftfaeI.P.C; v 3. Based on the above facts, respondents 1 & 2 hercin fiied claitu under Section 166 of the Motor Veliicles Act, 1988. before the Accident Clainis Tribuiial, Sui^uja, nientioning fhereia fhat the deceased was 21 years old, he was earaing Rs.5-,400/- per miontli and tliey were dependaat upon the deceased and on accouitt ofthe death of Satyaaarayaii they have been deprived of tlie pleasTirc of their sou and also froni fiaancial help. The-v claimed coruBensation to the tune of Rs. 13 lakhs. The defence of the appeUaiits and respondent No.3 herein before the Tribunal was that fhe truck ui question had not hit (he cycle in questfon as alleged as the same was staiiding iu the office compound beiug a HoU holiday, at ttie headquarters. Hoirever, the leamed Tribunal disbelieviag aad rejecting the defence of the appeUaiits aiid respondent No.3 hereiu, allowed ffae claiia of respondents 1 & 2 herein partiaUy as indieated iii the previous part of fhis order. 4. We ha.ve heard Mr. U.N.S. Deo, Govt. Advocate on behalf of fhe State/appcUaiits on tfac yicstion ofadiaission. 5. Mr. U.N.S. Deo.argued tliat the itupugned award offfae Tribiuial is perfferse as the e\7idence adduced by the appellants has not beea properlye'S.'ppreciated aad the Tribun.al has wroiialy disbelieved fhe evidcncc of fhc appcUaiits as wcll as thc cntrics inadc in thc log book of tfae rclevant truc^s: as the log book was bem.g regiiiarly mamtauied aiid entri^s were beiag made regularly as ofHcial act, 1B UOT^ganb UI 3{OIU1 3Tp TII SitinaAKit SBAI sq iSqi UHTI pssopsip niBy PTIGUV uos-iad auo 'uoiiBSnssAai 10 ssjn'oo stp Sui.mp 'vev^ p-svsis, .fyeviioSayes sev^ 3t[ '^tm.qT.ij, 3Tp.Aq uop.sanb 'e UQ •TieA'&ie'a'e-'q.^s- jo TpBsp 3tp guTsnEO Aqaiatp. pTie oe-bS-ZdM'^N ugg^JisiSsj StIUBSq 30T1.4 310. gUIALEp SITqAY l.USplOOB aTQ; SlIlSn'BO.IOJ £'0(1 ^aapuodssj -(.SUTBSB isaqs sSjeqo psig Ai3iBtct}pi pue ^OOZ/G^'OS sittua p3^iiSt).s3Aui aq SB lUBuoduii Xi3A OS^B si Ai3pte_^ jeqpTqsuBg 't7- d J° 30Tiap}A3 ai^t •uop.oauuoo STip TEI 'apAOTq atp. uo japu HOLlTld SB §ttt[[3ABn SB/& 3q 'eBaiaqAY 'aitnxg aip no 3pAO atp jp apis lUiMi 3Tft Ut 3'ar4'[S S'BM iieAia.TBtiBAiBS 'JBTO. psi.Ki.s J3qijnj seTl SH •jnoi:oo AWQaAjo SBM lasppoB scff. pssneo qorttA SIOTUI .aq). 'ioajjoo f.0Ti si •|7-ct'x3 1-iodai stp xxi aaaiS s'e psuori.aaTO: asaq GBT^ 'qsvc^S!, 2[oni). 3Tp. jo jnopo aip. vsv^ pai-e^s SBq sssxq.Tdi. STCp. •Tiop.'euiuiexs ssojo sqi ai •aottEig 30T(Oa aip sjojsq t'-d'xg -(Jodaj aqi paSpOI 3q 'J3-.ffB3J3ty. pTie u8A8JB1ieA}Bg 01. J35.13A 3A13g AT3113Ip3T sq }U3ppOT3 wp. isgs 'apAO sqi no p3SB303p 3Tp. TpTAt glII]J3ABfl. SBM 3X{ ITISpTOOB 3Tp JO STTTp aT^ IB ISTO pS^BlS A]JBOUOg3lBO S^q 3{3AO 3Tp ao pasisaoap aTp xpu»STIO^B SaiKaAs.q SBAI oq-w jenin^} T{safeg ^,-f&.d '4 •uonssnl:) ui 'spAo sqi i.rq qarqA^ '^pva aqi SBM og-bS-ZdN uoiisanb ui ?[orui arp. TBTp ppq ApqSu puB eiuB]j3d.dra aTp jo soasjap axp. pa^oafoj ApqSu s^q psunquj, psttiea^ sip ^v-Eft aoTOido paispTsaoo 3Tp jo are 3A '33U3plA3 STp. §UU3ptSH03pUB 8UTSru:3d -I3UV •'HOOqgo^ p3UJ33H03 3ip p'cce siuaui^.oop nieAsraj pire pjooai uo aoxiapTAs 310. pasiusd SABH 3AV 'Sl'IIBi'tadds OTp. -IOJ psim.03 paTuesi aqi p-TEaq SUIABH •o -OTTBIO sip psioafo-t a&'e'q 01 's.qSno '[eanq'u^, paujeai STO. 'siueQaddB 3q+ jo so'sispTAS svy. pue siooqgoT '[epigo sqi ca Sitproo^ pitB stTiBnirep 310. }o 33U3pl&3 3{e3A 3T{}. JO A3IA ui 'aiojaisqj. 'OIZT ST il=>n-4 arp jo a^Bttt aqi puB -mojoo AW^SA jo si oe-bg ~ZdVi'OK vi<3tfB,ziw'S3l Stitresq 3[OTU). sip s^sjaqM 'jno^oo uasjS jo pire ppora ^Ot, }o S'BAV spAo sTp. iTq qOTqa. ^anji aTp. vev^ psaoTi-aaTii t?-d'X3 3piA aridUBqyj ;uo>+eis 301103 atojaq ijodai Sitp[BTit aiiqA qssfey SB siqBASiisq qiJOM iou SBA sitteuitBp aqi jo aoaspiAS aqi wary. panSje ^sipjiij OH •uauoa axsM s[ooq§oi aq^ itl sairi.as STp. IBTp. 30U3.I3JIII: ICAVBJp 3A^q (q ^qgno piinqu^L pati-res^ aqi 'iov aons-pTAg srp. jo (a) -bT: •[ Tic'p.oag jo suOTSTaojd. 3^^ jo A\3iA TTI •'aiojajs'qT. 4 fc-7^ the tiine of th.e accident aud. a.e had also disclosed him tbat fhe tnick in. question caused fhe accident, The evidence of PW-2 Rajesh Kuinar and PW-4 Banshidhar Yadav furthcr staiid supportcd aad corroborated by the evidence of PW-3 Chamroo Siagh, Sarpanch of ViUage: Narkalo, who has stated ttiat on 30.3.2002 ha&d punip tioriu.g was done by'fb.e tniclE in. questton i.e. MPZ-8430 m. his village and ia token fhereofhe issued certificate Ex.P-5, S, As far as mentioniiig the greeu colour tn tfae report Ex. P-4 by FW-2 Rajesh is concerued, as fhe accident took place a!l of a sudden and on account of the accident it is'but natural that one caii becoine nervous and perturbed aad can. also coritmit uustake regarding inennoiung the colo-UT whfle giving rcport. Particiilarly this contracliction is not of (hat m.uch relevaiice Igokm.g to tlie otlier evidence on the record i.e. fhe evidence of Investigatuig Ofiicer Banshidhar Yadav (PW-4) and the evidence of Chaiiiroo Sinsh, Sarpanch (PW-3). As far as the evidenee ofPW-3 is concenied, it is true fhat Ex. D-1 certificate was issued by Chamroo Singh (PW-3) regarding the iiistaUation of hand pump aad this certificate was issued on 28.3.2002. He has also issued certi&cate Ex.P-5 saying that the truck ia. question caine to his v~iUage for installation of haild punip. In his cross-exanunation, he has categorically stated fhat Ex.P-5, fhe certtficate, was issued by htm on 30th March, 2002, at 5 p.m. 9. We have seen fhe cross-examination of this witness aad ta the cross-examination, fhe appellants were u.ot able to destroy his evidence ttiat flie truck in question came to Vfflage: Narkalo on 30.03,2002. Now, ia ffae Ught ofthe above evidence addiiced by fhe claimaiit^, if we look into fhe defence of the appeflants herein that the truck ia question. was stajucluig at the headquarters on the rclcvaQt day being a Hcrii holiday, the log book ofthe truck which is being regularly m.aiiitamed in the ofiicial performaace of the duty iadicates the saiae, The leamed Trifeunal has reiected the defence of fhe appeUants on the ginuaa that •29th Mairch, 2003, beiag Holi .^t^ ''.'•"•• . • : • fhat was hoUtiay aitd 30th March, 2003, was not a 'Holl hoUdav, • thcrcforc, thc dcfence of thc appcllaiits that being a Hou holiday fhe •truck in question was'standiag ia. the office coinpound was ill I'tBI 11;1 tl i!:l|!1! sipjo ssjnoo aq^ STtUTtp inq 'g •§ T siaspuo'Ssai o^ -7oOO'St''T'sy jo ^imoTire luiyp 3lp gmpilBMB Tn ^Su: IOH ssAii iBTmqi.tj^ sqi iBTp ii33[E). ussq SBq pTinai8 v TBadde at^ TII 'qSnoip TisAg •[BHnquj^ sqi.Aq H3S{K). ussq s^q T[OTTIA 'A31:A lT:Ia-t3J?IP B sspwioircreo 3A1 DUB p3UnquJ, 310. Aq pspjooai sSittpiig 3T(t qjn^spp 0} punojg Aire pug: iou op SAI 'iiortBmUiBxa-ssoao siq itt AOJissp c^ 3[qB itssq ^OU 3ABH S^OB'[[3d.dB 3Tp 30U3pTA3 seoqAi (t-Md) -isoig'o StiTiraSi^saATit aip '-qjErptopjBd ptre t7-;¥id •'? S-Atd 'C-A'\dJ0 soaaptAS 3Tp o^ S'ap(ooT osp3 pxre aAoqe psuoiiaaTti sTiosBai sq^ jo AUTA n:{ •30UBi];ai TpjoAi l.OH 3.IB S3U+H3 3S3U1. SB '3[OOqSOt 3TD JO S31-4U3 3q} SmAsiisqsip siitBH:3ddi3 sqi jo soaajsp sio. psiosfoj Ap.q8u seq TBrtnquj, srp ^raTp uoniiao paiapTsaoo sip jo aie 3Ai '^Tmqu^ atp jo SiiipTtg aqi piie siTieTiTrB{o aip Aq paonppB aoaspiAS 3AoqB aip jo AiaiA tn: pire siq^inqai si ^.sy aouapiAg aqijo (3) ^•[T 0011.335 .opun aondiimsaiij'OT "sooe'e'oe-ao 'ois SuuiBdai jo^BipBj pae qod JOj aru: 'ifco sip TTt •sniq os inoq®pssn S13A 5[3T1-4 STp. I'BTp. ^OOqBO^ 3tp TIT p3.I31U3 U33q S^q fl 3pTS J3qi0 3qi ao inq '.fepi{oq v Sroaq panoduioa soigo sip TII SutpUCTS SBAV 5[3iLq s/qi yBTf^ psi^j.s 3ABq Aaqi 'aoBid isjg 310 ui •Aioi.oipunaoo-jias SBA pnnodlHOO 3331:0 3Tp 131 SlIIpTEBlS SBd-l. 3[OT1-E1. 310 'AEpT[Oq 13 §TII3qTBtft llta.iaq eiTlBTTaddB aq} Aq Ti3![gl aouajsp sip •seiAuaipo .ti9Ag 'soaajsp 3Tp 3iBa.to 01 jspuo ai sSjBqs-ui-.issigo J-OTUSS sqT. Aq psgusA pw 3pBUI 3J3AY SSulHS 3S3II1 |TB 1T3TI1. SMOUS J{3S11: 10BI STqj.. •3§JBU3-OT -.laogio sin Aq PSTI^ISA 3J3A1 STOTU^ jo ssn 310 Stnp.iBSsj j3Aup qoiu^ aqi Aq apBm ssuias.gT^ HB 'gQOS 'qaiBW ».ieTtR 'ZOOE 'qaiBi^ tpCZ-, TSOIf 'jaASA^OH 'SUEtBJadO SBM ^OTU^ aqi. TioTetAisclne SSOI[AS. -ispiin 38.reT[3-in-.i33iig:o stp. AC!~ pag:i,i3A SJSA^ .isAup a'qo. Aq sp^rat sauiTis oa '500S 'qo.ieij^ qivS tiR. SiituinSsq sip.'rooj^ iqSu I'eqi Siiisudjns ST 1.} •5[OTL4 3TO 10 3SII 3T{1 gmp.IBSs.I JSAUp SIp Aq 3pBm S3LT).U3 aqi -yu:3A 01 paimbsj si agjBUO-Tll-jasigo aqi 'unm^os ^,6 aqi IIL iBlp. s^BsAai qoiqM '^oocftoj ajy. paeiusd os{e 3A^q a/ft -aSGd ^se{ 310. jo pTia sqi ]][q. pssn gaTaq ST 'qooqSo^ aq.j^ -.reaA ^BTOTIBHI]: 3Tp.jo Suisop SIp TptAV 33U82\3rai OU SBq 5{OOC|30]: 9TR. 10 SOireHSltireTOl Slp. IBIp. psAissqo jsipjiy: •p3imquj, psTuesi sqj. •SQOZ ''qo-re]A[ isT e ati pssop aq 01 TlMoqs liaaq seq srooqgo^ ^UBAS^S-E aq.j, •aonajap SS^BJ aiBais o^ japio UT apBiit ajsM ^fBp itiBAapj 310 jo ^ooqso]' sip. ui esuiTts atp. yp3 ireqi psAiasqo jgip-rry ^BTTnqi-tj, p3tu83( sqj, 'p3A3i];3qsTp A- b Sonii argT.unents, leamed Goyt. Advocate could not xaake out a point fhat how fhe findiog of the Tribuilal regarding this corapensation is not corrcct, The learacd TTibunal has assesscd only Rs.9,000/- per annum towards the depeudency of parents. At the time of the accident, father ofthe deceased i.e. respondent No. 1 was 40 years of age, therefore, the inultiplier of 15 has rightly been applied by the Tribitnal. Therefore, in any way, fhe coaipensation awarded t>y the Tribunal is not excessive. ll.In the circumstaaces, we do not&id.auy substaace ia this appeali The saine fa3s aad is liable to be disnussed. Thei-efore. it is herebv disnussed^at the adnussion stage itself. ' i Sd/- | L.C. Bhadoo ! Judge Sd/- i Chief Justice^ I1 1