Smt. Jaggo Bai v. Forest Range Officer & Anr.

Smt. Jaggo Bai, Wife of Chaiter Ram Dugga, aged about 35 years, Bijeram, S/o Chaiter Ram Dugga, Aged about 12 years, Ajay Kumar, S/o Chaiter Ram, aged about 08 years, Ku. Manbati, D/o Chaiter Ram Dugga, aged about 05 years, C./0d-t-t*-n^ ^-U-A^&^y<?vV"^-^a^*^) Smt. Somari Bai, D/o Dukaruram Dugga, aged About 60 years, All R/o Village Madpa, Post Kolar, P.S. Raoghat, Tahsil Antagarh, District North Bastar Kanker (CG) Shyamlal, S/o Rejuram, Radami, aged 24 years, R/o village Baihasalhebhat, Post Kolar, P.S. Raoghat, Tahsil Antagarh, District North Bastar Kanker (CG) Chairman, Forest Protection Committee, Village - Talabeda, Through: Meghnath S/o Pulleram Dhruv, aged 47 Years, R/o Talabeda, Post Kolar, P. S. Raoghat, Tahsil Antagarh, District North Bastar Kanker (CG) G APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT. 1988. u\{p HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH: HON'BLE DR. I.M.QUDDUSI & HON'BLE MR. G. MINHAJUDDIN. JJ. M.A.fClNo. 1072/2011 Appellants Forest Range Officer and another Respondents Hemchand Patel and others Vs M.A.(C)No. 1113/2011 Appellants Forest Range Officer and another Respondents Smt. Siyabai and others Vs M.A.(C)No.1114/2011 Appellants Forest Range Officer and another Respondents Smt. Jaggo Bai and others Vs Present: Mr. Vinay Harit, Dy. Advocate General for the State/appellants. Mr. PP Sahu and Mr. SP Sahu, Advocates for respondents - Shyamlal and Chairman, Forest Protection Committee. Mr. Anil Das Kuldeep, counsel No.1072/11, for respondents No. respondents No. 2 to 4 in MA(c) No.11 14/11. in MA(c) 1 & 2 in MA(c) No.1113/11 and for respondent No. 1 ORDER (Oral) (20thApril,2012) Per Dr. I.M. Quddusi. J 01) These appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 have been filed by the State against the awards dated

28.3.2011 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (FTC), Bhanupratappur, Distt. North Bastar, Kanker (in short "the Tribunal") in Claim Cases No.41/10, 42/10 & 43/10 respectively, fastening the liability to pay compensation to the claimants upon the appellants, jointly and severally, along with driver and owner of the vehicle. Since all appeals arise out of the same accident, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order. 02) Brief facts of the case, as per averments made in the claim petitions, are that on 24.12.2009 while Hemchand Patel, Suresh Kumar Nag, Chaiterram Dugga along with other labours were going from Village-Antagarh to Village-Madpa by tractor bearing registration No. CG 04-9132 and trolley No. CG 04-9133, on account of rash and negligent driving by non- applicant No.1 Shyamlal, the said vehicle turned turtle beside the road. Due to the said accident, Hemchand Patel sustained grievous injuries, Suresh Kumar Nag died on the spot and Chaiterram Dugga also died during treatment on

27.12.2009. At the relevant time, the vehicle was being driven by non-applicant No.1 Shyamlal and owned by non-applicant No.2 Chairman, Forest Protection Committee. 03) Injured Hemchand Patel and the legal heirs/dependents of deceased Suresh Kumar Nag and Chaiterram Dugga filed separate claim petitions under Section 166 of Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Tribunal for compensation to the Motor the tune of Rs.5,50,000/-, Rs.8,30,000/- and Rs.12,30,000/- respectively. 04) Learned Tribunal, after hearing counsel for the respective parties and on close scrutiny of the evidence adduced by the parties before it, by the impugned awards granted a total compensation of Rs.17,000/- in favour of injured Hemchand Patel, Rs.2,65,000/- in favour of dependents/claimants deceased Suresh Kumar Nag and Rs.4,25,000/- in favour of dependents/claimants of deceased Chaiterram Dugga, fastening the liability upon the appellants, jointly and severally, along with driver and owner of the vehicle. 05) We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the LCR as also the impugned awards. 06) Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the liability to pay compensation should have been fastened upon P^MI'i v^ the Chairman, Forest Protection Committee, jointly and severally along with non-applicant No.1 & 3, whereas the Tribunal has wrongly fastened the liability jointly and severally along with the appellants/State. 07) The contention of learned counsel for the appellants/State appears to be correct one as the fund or the property which belongs to the Forest Protection Committee cannot be interfered with by the State Government or its Forest Department. Therefore, in the instant case the liability should not have been fastened upon the appellants/State. 08) In view of the above, we allow these appeals in part. The impugned awards are modified to the extent that the liability to pay compensation to the claimants shall be of the Forest Protection Committee, jointly and severally, along with non- applicant No. 1 & 3. The impugned awards shall be executed accordingly. 09) No order as to costs. ^-^ Sd/- Dr. I.M. Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge '£<' .•!^:>: 1 1 1 "'s%SIJt '%.,. ^--^/ ^^&^^' ^