Swaran Kanta and Others vs Manohar Lal and Others

S.S. Sodhi, J.—A stranded truck parked on the road without any indication or warning of it being there, led to three other vehicles, a truck and two cars, being involved in accidents there. This offending truck was HRA 7831. In the first instance, it was the car DLF 5447 that came and hit into it. In quick succession thereafter, there came the truck DHG 2801 which hit into this car from behind and this truck in turn was struck into by the car DLB 9186. This is what led to the death of Puran Chand who was travelling in this ill-fated car that is DLB 9186. This happened at about midnight on the night intervening December 3 and 4, 1977 near village Larsoli on the Grand Trunk Road between Panipat and Delhi.

The Tribunal held this to be an inevitable accident and consequently absolved all the Respondents from blame. No compensation was thus awarded to the claimants, they being the parents, widow and children of Puran Chand deceased.

The accident being branded as an inevitable accident with neither of the drivers of the four vehicles involved, being to blame is indeed an untenable conclusion. It is well settled that where a motor vehicle is left parked on a highway in such a manner that it constitutes a hazard or danger to road users, the onus is upon the driver and owner of such vehicle to show that despite the vehicle being so parked, the accident took place due to the fault or negligence of the party that came to be involved in an accident with it or at any rate that such other party could have avoided the accident by reasonable care and caution. In dealing with this aspect of the matter, it would be pertinent to note that no driver or owner of either of the trucks HRA 7831 or DHG 2801 appeared in the witness box nor for that matter the owner or driver of the car DLF 5447. It was only the driver of the car DLB 9186 in which Puran Chand deceased was travelling who came to depose to the accident, he being RW 2 Balbir Singh. The other witnesses to the accident being PW 5 Deep Chand and PW 7 Prem.

Both PW 5 Deep Chand and PW 7 Prem testified to the fact that the truck HRA 7831 was parked on the road without any light. Further, that the car DLF 5447 came from behind and hit into it and shortly thereafter another truck came and hit into this car and finally it was the car DLB 9186 that came and struck against the second truck and Puran Chand deceased who was travelling in this car died at the spot. According to them, all these accidents took place within the space of few minutes. What deserves particular attention in dealing with the testimony of these two witnesses is the fact that no suggestion was made to them to the effect that any of the drivers of the vehicles, involved in the accident, could or could not have avoided this accident with due care and caution which they should have been expected to exercise in the circumstances.

As mentioned earlier, the only driver of the vehicles involved in the accident who appeared in the witness box was RW 2 Balbir Singh, the driver of the car DLB 9186. He deposed that when he reached Ghanaur, he saw a truck parked ahead. A truck and a car had already been involved in accidents there. When he reached near that place, he wanted to turn to his right hand side, but found a Haryana Roadways bus coming from opposite direction and he could not therefore, avert his car too being involved in an accident with the vehicles already piled up there. In other words, the situation so arose for this driver that the accident indeed became inevitable for him but it took place due to those other vehicles being on the road in that fashion.

Considered in their totality, the circumstances here clearly show that primarily it was the negligence of the truck HRA 7831 in being parked on the road without proper warning that resulted in all the other vehicles hitting into each other there. There can be no manner of doubt with regard to the negligence of the driver of the truck HRA 7831. As regards the truck DHG 2801 and the car DLF 5447, the burden lay upon their drivers to show that despite reasonable care they could not have avoided the accident, but as neither of them chose to come into the witness box to narrate their version of the accident, a finding of negligence must be returned against them too. The driver of the car DLB 9186 has, however, to be absolved from blame, as he came forth with a plausible explanation of how his car came to be involved in the accident. It follows from this that the accident here must be attributed to the negligence of the drivers of the trucks HRA 7831 and DHG 2801 and the car DLF 5447. The finding on the issue of negligence must be modified accordingly.

Next to consider is the quantum of compensation payable to the claimants, they being the parents, widow and five minor children of Puran Chand deceased. The evidence on record would show that Puran Chand deceased was about 31 years of age at the time of his death. He was running a shop and his income from there, as per testimony of his widow PW 2 Swarn Kanta was about Rs. 600/- per month. Earlier he had been employed with the Central Public Works Department as a Stenographer. PW 4 Sri Krishan Sharma, Lower Division Clerk of that department deposed that when the deceased resigned from service in June, 1975, his gross salary was Rs. 581.50 per month. This being so it would be reasonable to take the income of the deceased at Rs. 600/- per month.

The compensation payable in such cases has to be assessed keeping in view the principles laid down by the Full Bench in Lachman Singh v. Gurmit Kaur 1979 ACJ 170 (P and H). So considered in the context of the circumstances of the claimants and the deceased ''16'' would clearly be the appropriate multiplier to be applied and the dependency deserves to be taken at Rs. 5.000/- per annum. This would work out to Rs. 80,000/-.

The claimants are accordingly hereby awarded Rs. 80,000/- (Rs. eighty thousand only) as compensation which they shall be entitled to along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of the application to the date of the payment of the amount awarded. Out of the amount awarded, a sum of Rs. 5,000/- each shall be payable to the father, mother and children of the deceased and the balance to his widow. The amount payable to the minor claimants shall be paid to them in such manner as the Tribunal may deem to be in their best interest.

Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5 and 7 to 9 shall be jointly and severally liable for the compensation awarded.

This appeal is hereby accepted with costs. Counsel''s fee Rs. 500/-.