Motor Accident Claims Tribunal junks wife plea after man’s death
Ramkrishan Upadhyay
Chandigarh, July 23
The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal here has dismissed a claim petition of a woman seeking compensation for the death of her husband in an accident. The tribunal has dismissed the petition on the grounds that the claimants have failed to prove that the driver of the PCR was driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent way.
Rs 70 lakh compensation demanded
The woman claimed that at the time of her husband’s death, he was 25-year-old and was earning 20,000 per month. She demanded a compensation of Rs 70 lakh along with 12 per cent interest per annum
A woman, Asha, had filed a claim petition on account of the death of her husband Ashok Kumar. She said on July 22, 2018, after finishing his work her husband Ashok Kumar was returning home from Panchkula on a motorcycle. A person, Kapil Kumar, was also riding pillion. When they reached the Hallo Majra Chowk after crossing the airport traffic light point, Chandigarh, a PCR vehicle started chasing them.
The driver of the PCR suddenly stopped the vehicle in front of their motorcycle after taking a sharp left turn. As a result, the motorcycle collided with the PCR. Ashok and Kapil fell on the road and were seriously injured. Due to the injuries, Ashok later died on the spot while Kapil was taken to the hospital by the police. The accident was caused due to alleged rash and negligent driving, Asha alleged.
She claimed that at the time of his death, he was 25-year-old and was earning 20,000 per month. She demanded a compensation of Rs 70 lakh along with 12 per cent interest per annum.
On the other hand, the driver of the PCR vehicle denied the charges and claimed that the deceased himself was negligent while driving the motorcycle. After hearing the arguments the tribunal said the claimants were duty bound to show that Ashok had died due to rash and negligent driving of the respondent. But in this case, as per eyewitness Kapil, a PCR vehicle started following them when they were going to Ram Darbar. All of a sudden the driver of the PCR vehicle overtook their motorcycle and stopped in front of them, due to which Ashok rammed his motorcycle into the PCR. The tribunal said if the stand taken by the eyewitness was considered to be true, then it was the duty of the claimants to show why the police vehicle was chasing them and if it was so then Ashok might have disobeyed some instructions of the police. He could have slowed down the motorcycle and ask the police the reason for following him.
The tribunal said, “It seems that when the motorcyclist did not stop, the PCR overtook the motorcycle to stop him. The speed of the motorcycle was so high that the deceased could not control his motorcycle and rammed into the stationed PCR.”
The tribunal further said a person who was a wrongdoer could not be rewarded for his wrongful acts. In this case, since the claimants have failed to show the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the police vehicle, there is no ground to grant compensation to them, it said.
