The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) in Gurgaon has ordered a compensation of Rs 16.5 lakh, along with 7% annual interest from the date of filing the petition, to the family of a 24-year-old man named Deepak who died in a road accident in 2022. The tribunal held the truck driver guilty of rash and negligent driving and directed the insurance company to pay the compensation with recovery rights.
Accident Details
The accident occurred on June 21, 2022, around 11:45 am near the SS Group Building in Sector 86. Deepak was traveling to Hayatpur when a truck bearing registration number RJ-13GA-9132 collided with his motorcycle. Deepak suffered fatal injuries and was declared brought dead at the Civil Hospital. An FIR under Sections 279 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code was registered at Kherki Daula police station.
Arguments Presented
Claimant's Argument
Advocate Manoj Yadav, representing the family, argued that the accident was solely caused by the truck driver Balwant Singh's rash and negligent driving. He relied on the FIR, an eyewitness's testimony, the post-mortem report, and a chargesheet to establish negligence.
Defense Arguments
Advocate Anoop Singh, counsel for Balwant Singh, contended that the accident did not occur due to his client's negligence, alleging that Deepak was driving in a zig-zag manner. He also claimed the truck was empty and was being driven to a workstation for repairs.
Advocate Manish Vashisht, appearing for the insurance company, argued that there was no reliable independent evidence of negligence. He further claimed breach of policy conditions, alleging absence of a valid permit and questioning the validity of the driving license. The insurer also alleged contributory negligence by Deepak and termed the claim exaggerated.
Tribunal's Observations
The tribunal termed the argument that a permit is not required for an empty truck as legally untenable, observing that a goods vehicle remains a transport vehicle even when not carrying goods. The tribunal also noted that strict proof of the accident is not required in such cases and a holistic view must be taken.
Verdict
The tribunal rejected the defense arguments and held that the FIR, eyewitness account, and police chargesheet clearly established negligent driving by the truck driver. The driver admitted being present at the scene and failed to convincingly rebut the allegations. The tribunal concluded that while the driver-owner was primarily liable, the insurance company must satisfy the award first and then recover the amount from the owner due to permit violations.
