BEFORE THE MEMBER, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO. 3, KAMRUP (M), GUWAHATI Present:- Sri T. Kalita, AJS Member, MACT No.3, Kamrup (Metro), Guwahati MAC case No. 1863/2017 1. Smt Hemalata Bora(mother of the deceased) 2. Krishna kanta Bora (father of the deceased) Vill- Ghatuapara, P.S. Mangaldoi Dist. Darrang, Assam …….. Claimants -vs- 1. Tulen Sarma S/O Ramesh Sarma Vill- Mazdia, P.S. Nalbri, Dist. Nalbari, Assam ….owner of involved vehicle 2. Ramesh Baishya S/O Late Sana Ram Baishya Vill- Japarkuchi, P.S. Nalbar ….driver of involved vehicle 3. M/S New India Assurance Co. Ltd. ….insurer of involved vehicle ....... Opposite parties APPEARANCE:- For Claimant : Mr. Bikramjit Sarma For OP No. 3 : Mr. K.K. Bhatta Date of Argument : 02.07.2019 Date of Judgment : 07.08.2019 MAC Case 1863/2017 Page 1 of 6 J U D G M E N T Brief description of the case: 1. One Hemalata Bora and Krishna Kanta Bora have filed an application U/S 166 R/W section 140 of MV Act, 1988, claiming compensation for the death of their son namely, Jintu Moni Borah in a motor vehicle accident occurred on 24.06.2017 at about 10.45pm on the NH-15 at Barpalaha, due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of a motor cycle bearing No. AS-25-BC-3695. The occurrence also involved a motor cycle bearing No. AS-01-DG-5690. Contention of OP : 2. The OP No.3, the insurer of the vehicle contested the case by filing written statement however denied the fact that the accident occurred involving the vehicle. Accordingly the company urged upon the claimant to prove the case strictly and genuinely. However, the company has not specifically denied the fact that the accident was not occurred and the fact that the vehicle was not insured with the company. 3. On the other hand, the OP No.1 and 2 the owner and driver of the vehicle did not contest the case for which the case proceeded ex-parte against them. 4. In support of the case, claimant Hemalata Borah has examined herself as PW-1 and submitted some documents along with one Kankan Barman and Sitaram Das as PW-2 and 3. On the other hand the OP has not adduced any evidence. 5. I have perused the existing available materials on record, heard the learned counsel and accordingly proceed to dispose the case for settlement of the claim. Evidence of the claimant: 6. It is the evidence of claimant Hemalata Borah that on 24.6.2017 while her son Jintu Moni Borah was proceeding from Guwahati towards Mangaldoi by riding his motor cycle bearing No.AS-01-DG-5690 met with an accident at Barpalaha when the driver of a Tata Ace vehicle bearing No. AS-25-BC-3695 driven in a very rash and negligent manner knocked him down from his back side causing serious injuries to him, due to which the motor cycle he was driving hit on a tree. He was immediately taken to Bezera CHC but the doctor referred him to GMCH. But he was admitted at MAC Case 1863/2017 Page 2 of 6 Narayana Hospital in a critical condition but subsequently shifted to Hayat Hospital but unfortunately he died on 26.6.2017. he was aged about 22 years at the relevant time and was a permanent employee as a Manager in Maa Sarbeswari Tent House, Nalbari and drawing a salary of Rs. 15,000/- per month. At the time of his death he left herself and his father. He was the only bread earner of the family. The accident occurred because of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Tata Ace bearing No. AS-25- BC-3695 and a police case was registered against the driver of the offending vehicle vide Baihata Chariali PS case No. 193/17. The police however laid charge sheet against the driver of the offending Tata Ace. She had spent around Rs. 1,92,460/- in the medical treatment of her son. She has submitted accident information report, birth certificate, certified copy of postmortem, driving licence, medical record, FIR together with certified copy of charge sheet as Exbt-1 to 9. However, she did not see the accident. Her son was riding a motor cycle at the relevant time from Nalbari to Mangaldoi. The bike belongs to her son but the vehicle was not made party. She has not submitted any MVI report, seizure list, sketch map except FIR and charge sheet. However, she has admitted that her son took admission in degree after completing his HS at the relevant time. She has stated in her claim petition against the occupation of the deceased as not applicable against the occupation of the deceased. However, she has denied the suggestion that her son is not a student and was not earning member of the family. Her husband is a cultivator. She denied the suggestion that she is not dependent on the income of her deceased son. 7. PW-2 is one Kankan Barman, who is doing business since 2007 and dealing in Tent house in the name and style of Maa Sarbeswari Tent House. But he has not submitted any document and any trade licence to show that the tent house under the name and style as Maa Sarbeswari Tent House is a registered unit or he is authorized to carry out the business. However, he has claimed that all the formalities were done by his father. According to him one Jintu Moni Bora was working under his establishment. He has not submitted any document that he is the owner of the tent house. He has not submitted any paper regarding the income of his establishment. He has not maintained any register also. He has claimed that he paid salary in cash but without keeping any receipt. He has not maintained any acquaintance register. 8. PW-3 is one Sitaram Das, who claimed to have eye witnessed the occurrence. MAC Case 1863/2017 Page 3 of 6 He saw a magic vehicle coming from Baihata Chariali towards Sipajhar immediately dashed against a pulsar vehicle which was driven by the rider. Accordingly the rider fell down on the ground and he himself approached to the place of occurrence and give him first aid and at that time police came to the place of occurrence and left the place. However, his statement was recorded by police and he is a charge sheet witness. The accident occurred at about 10.30pm. The motor cycle was dashed away by the Magic from its back side. However, there was no standing or fallen tree at the place of occurrence. Conclusion : 9. Now, from having perused the evidence of witnesses together with the documents so submitted, it appears that a vehicular accident took place on 24.6.2017 on the NH-15 at Barpalaha wherein one Jintu Moni Bora, a motor cyclist was found to have sustained injury because of rash and negligent driving of the driver of a Tata Ace bearing No. AS-25-BC-3695. The evidence as it appears that on the day of occurrence at about 10.30pm when Jintu Moni Bora by riding his motor cycle was coming from Guwahati (Nalbari) towards Mangaldoi, he was knocked down by a Tata Ace at Barpalaha driven in a very rash and negligent manner thereby causing him serious injuries. He was immediately taken toBezera CHC and then was referred to GMCH but was admitted at Narayana Hospital and then shifted to Hayat Hospital. But, he succumbed to his injuries at Hayat Hospital on 26.6.2017. Baihata Chariali PS case No. 193/17 was registered and the police after having completed the investigation laid charge sheet against the driver of the offending Tata Ace. The extract copy of GDE No. 632 and 633, upon perusal goes to show that the motor cycle bearing No. AS-01-DG- 5690 and Tata Ace bearing No. AS-25-BC-3695 met with an accident at Barpalaha and both the vehicles were seized by police. The accident occurred because of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Tata Ace since the driver of the Tata Ace tried to overtake the motor cycle and then dashed against the vehicle from its back side. As a result the rider of the motor cycle sustained grievous injuries and was immediately taken to Bezera HC with the help of 108. Relatives were informed over telephone and both the vehicles were however taken to thana for inspection purpose. The police however, laid charge sheet against the driver of the Tata Ace, established the fact that the accident occurred because of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Tata MAC Case 1863/2017 Page 4 of 6 Ace. So, the plea raised by the OP that the case is bad for non joinder of necessary parties such as motor cycle ridden by the deceased is not found fatal. Quantum of compensation : 10. It is the case of the claim of the claimant that the deceased was 22 years as per the claim petition, which is supported by the date of birth as mentioned in the driving licence issued by DTO, Darrang, Mangaldoi. Though, it is claimed by the claimant that the deceased was working as a Manager in a tent house under the name and style of Maa Sarbeswari Tent house but the claimant in her cross examination has stated that her son took admission in degree after completing his HS at the relevant time.