Kin of road mishap victim gets Rs 44.47 lakh compensation

The family members of a man, who was crushed to death after his two-wheeler was hit by a tempo in 2009, has been awarded a compensation of over Rs 44 lakh by a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) here.
The tribunal directed the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd, with which the tempo was insured, to pay a compensation of Rs 44,47,656 to the kin of 33-year-old Ravinder Gosani, who was working in a private firm here and was crushed to death in a road accident in Gurgaon in Haryana in July 2009.
While awarding compensation, the tribunal relied upon the testimony of Kuldeep Koul, an eye-witness to the incident, and the documents produced before it.

"Thus in view of testimony of PW1 (Gosani's wife) and PW4 (Koul) and documents on record, the negligence of driver of offending vehicle has been prima facie proved," the MACT said.
The order came on a petition filed by the family members of Gosani seeking compensation on the ground that he had died in the road accident due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending tempo.
They told the tribunal that on July 1, 2009, Gosani was riding his two-wheeler and was going for his official work in Gurgaon in Haryana.

When he was on his way, a rashly driver tempo hit his motorcycle from behind and he sustained grievous injuries in the accident, they said, adding that he was rushed to a nearby hospital where he succumbed to his injuries.

Koul told the tribunal that on the day of the accident, he was driving his motorcycle behind Gosani's two wheeler and when they reached near Islampur village, a tempo trailer hit the Gosani's motorcycle from behind.
He also said that tempo's driver fled the spot after the accident and he had taken Gosani to a hospital in Gurgaon but the injured had died on the way itself.
The owner and driver of the offending vehicle did not file any statement before the tribunal and were proceeded ex-parte.
The insurance firm contested the plea saying "contributory negligence" on the Gosani's part cannot be ruled out.

The tribunal, however, held that the firm was unable to produce any evidence in support of their contention.