CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench(1994) 02 MP CK 0038

Rajkumari Najgarh and Others vs Lajjaram Gupta and Others

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 1 February 1994 · Citation: (1994) ACJ 953

HON’BLE JUDGES
S.K. Dubey, J · S.K. Chawla, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Misc. Petition No. 732 of 1993

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 351 words

S.K. Dubey and S.K. Chawla, JJ.—Counsel heard.

2.

Petitioners challenge the order of the Claims Tribunal, whereby the amount of interim award was not awarded by the Claims Tribunal on the ground that in the criminal case filed in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Shivpuri, the trial court has discharged the accused, the driver of the truck in question, holding that the truck at the relevant time was in a stationary condition and, therefore, unless the order of discharge is set aside by the superior court, the claimants are not entitled for the compensation under interim award.

3.

In our opinion, the Claims Tribunal has exceeded in its jurisdiction. In case of no fault liability, the consideration whether the driver of the vehicle in question was negligent or not is irrelevant. That has to be decided after enquiry and at the time of final award. Prima facie there was material to demonstrate that the truck in question was involved in the accident and, therefore, on lodging of the report, the truck was seized and then given on spurge .After arrest of the driver of the truck, he was bailed out and on completion of the investigation the challan was filed against the driver. It is well settled that the findings of the criminal case are not binding on the Claims Tribunal and, therefore, in our opinion, the Tribunal has exceeded in its jurisdiction in not awarding the amount of compensation under interim award on the basis of no fault liability.

4.

Therefore, in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Claims Tribunal cannot be sustained and is quashed. The insurance company shall deposit the amount of Rs. 25,000/- with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum.

5.

At this stage, the learned counsel for the insurance company submits that the claimants be directed to furnish security. For that the insurance company shall be free to make a prayer before the Claims Tribunal.

6.

The petition is disposed of in terms of the observations and directions hereinabove with costs.

Counsel''s fee Rs. 250A, if pre-certified.