AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Devi Prasad Singh, J.—Heard the learned Counsel for the appellants, learned Counsel for the claimants as well as perused record.
These four appeals u/s 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, filed before this Court, relate to one and the same accident, and involve the common questions of law, hence, are decided by the present common judgment:
In brief, the facts emerging from the record are that on 30.6.1981, the deceased were going in the Jeep No. UP-15-B-5571, from village Surjipur to attend a marriage party in village Lokvapur. The Jeep was driven by one Sanjai of village Khetui. At about 9.15 p.m., when the Jeep arrived near the culvert of village Bamhna Khera, a Tractor No. UP-32-A-8083 driven by Shiv Prasad rashly and negligently, hit the Jeep from reverse side resulting in serious damage to the Jeep and causing grievous injuries to the persons boarded in the Jeep. Five persons succumbed to injuries. An F.I.R. of the accident was lodged at Police Station Baghaulipur District Hardoi.
The claimants approached the Tribunal for payment of compensation u/s 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
The Tribunal framed issues with regard to Insurance Policy coverage, rash negligent driving as well as driving license and arrived at the conclusion that the accident occurred because of rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the tractor. The tractor was without any headlight and it dashed with the Jeep when the same was parked by the left side of the road. The Tribunal observed that the tractor was having no headlight and the tractor driver was driving the tractor in a very rashly and negligently, and hit the Jeep parked on the left side of the road.
Learned Counsel for the appellants raised solitary argument that it is a case of contributory negligence and compensation awarded by the Tribunal, should be equally divided. Submission of appellants'' counsel seems to be not correct keeping in view the fact that the tractor driver dashed with the Jeep while coming from reverse side at the time when the Jeep was parked on the left side of the road.
A vehicle which is parked on its left side of the road, cannot be held to be negligent and also not liable to share the burden to pay compensation. It does not seem to be a case of contributory negligence. Rather, it seems to be exclusive negligence on the part of the tractor driver, who was driving the tractor without any headlight and hit the Jeep parked on the left side of the road.
No other ground has been raised or pressed by the learned Counsel for the appellants. We also do not find any substantial illegality and perversity in the impugned Award rendered by the Tribunal. The Award seems to not suffer from any perversity or substantial illegality. The appeals seem to be devoid of merit and are liable to be dismissed.
The appeals are accordingly dismissed. The amount deposited in this Court, shall be remitted to the Tribunal. The appellants shall also deposit rest of the amount if any, within two months from today in the Tribunal. No costs.