Skip to main content

Family of accident victim gets Rs 46 lakh compensation - MACT

The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), Pune, has awarded a compensation of Rs 46.26 lakh to the husband and 13-year-old son of a 39-year-old woman who was killed in a road accident on the old Pune-Mumbai highway at Pimpri in 2009. They had filed a claim of Rs 40 lakh and the MACT awarded more compensation considering age and earning capacity of the deceased.

MACT member N P Dhote ordered that the compensation be jointly paid by the truck's owner Aruna Jadhav of Pimpri and The Oriental Insurance Company Limited with seven percent interest from the date of filing the petition in 2010 till the realisation of the amount.

The deceased, Swita Devraju (39) of Chinchwad, was serving as a teacher with Hindustan Antibiotics School. She was a permanent employee and earned Rs 26,595 per month. On December 7, 2009, Swita and her friend Asha Bansode were going to Chinchwad via the old Pune-Mumbai highway. Swita was driving the two-wheeler. At around 5.30 pm , a truck came from behind and hit the two-wheeler. Swita died while Bansode sustained injuries.

Based on Bansode's complaint, the Pimpri police station had arrested the truck driver for rash and negligent driving.

In March 2010, Swita's husband Venkatrayyappa (46) and their son Prathmesh moved the MACT seeking Rs 40 lakh compensation. Advocate K K Bandal represented the family.

The truck owner did not appear before the tribunal while the insurance company submitted that the deceased herself was responsible for the accident due to her rash and negligent driving.

However, the judge observed that the accident took place in the middle of a 40-ft wide road and it was not dark at the time of incident.

The judgement said that the truck driver was responsible for rash and negligent driving. While driving heavy vehicle, more particularly on roads passing through cities, extra care is required to be taken. Considering the vicarious liabilty of the truck owner and the insurance company, they have to jointly pay the compensation amount".

Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/pune/Family-of-accident-victim-gets-Rs-46-lakh-compensation/articleshow/20830992.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Amendment of plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC explained

Cause Title :  Ganesh Prasad vs Rajeshwar Prasad, SLP (C) NO. 28377 OF 2018, Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : 14/3/2023 Corum : J. B. Pardiwala, J. Citied:  Revajeetu Builders and Developers v. Narayanaswamy & Sons and Others reported in (2009) 10 SCC 84 North Eastern Railway Administration, Gorakhpur v. Bhagwan Das reported in (2008) 8 SCC 511 P.A. Jayalakshmi v. H. Saradha and Others reported in (2009) 14 SCC 525 B.K. Narayana Pillai v. Parameswaran Pillai and Another reported in (2000) 1 SCC 712 A.K. Gupta and Sons Ltd. v. Damodar Valley Corporation reported in AIR 1967 SC 96 Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Sanjeev Builders Private Limited and Another, Civil Appeal No. 5909 of 2022 dated 01.09.2022 Firm Sriniwas Ram Kumar v. Mahabir Prasad and Others reported in AIR 1951 SC 177 G. Nagamma and Another v. Siromanamma and Another reported in (1996) 2 SCC 25 Praful Manohar Rele v. Krishnabai Narayan Ghosalkar and Others reported in (2014...
Post a Comment
Read more

Owner of vehicle is not expected to verify the genuineness of the driving license before appointing a driver

Cause Title : Rishi Pal Singh Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 4919 Of 2022, The Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : July 26, 2022 Corum : Hemant Gupta; J., Vikram Nath; J. Background the truck owned by the appellant met with an accident. The owner deposed before the court that before employing the driver, he had taken his driving test and that he was driving the vehicle satisfactorily and  that the driver was employed with him for 3 years before the date of the accident. He produced his driving license. This was reaffirmed by the driver who deposed that the driving license was obtained from the driver and it was issued from Nagaland, but no such license was produced on record. Both the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the High Court have held that the owner has alleged that the driver had a driving license from Nagaland but the same was not produced and therefore, the Insurance Company is entitled to recover the awarded amount...
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more