Thane Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) has directed a transporter and an insurance company to pay a compensation of Rs 20 lakh to the kin of a textile designer in a 2014 accident case.
District Judge KD Vadane in the judgement delivered recently, directed owner of the truck Mahendra Singh from Ahmedabad and insurance firm United India Insurance Company to jointly pay Rs 20 lakh as compensation to family members of Kishore Deekonda (then aged 25), who died in a road mishap last year.
Appearing for the claimants, counsel Shankar C Bodulla told the Tribunal that the deceased worked as a textile design master with a firm Ramesh Creations in Bhiwandi here and drew a salary of Rs 16,000 per month.
Also Read
On March 3, 2014, while Kishore was going to attend a textile designing class along with his friend on a motorcycle, a speeding truck dashed into the two-wheeler from behind near Kalyan Jakata Naka, killing him on the spot.
The counsel said that it was due to negligence of the truck driver the mishap occurred and the youth died. Hence, he was eligible for the claim amount.
The owner of the truck did not appear before the court nor made any submission. Therefore, the forum declared the matter as ex-parte against the owner.
Insurance firm United India Insurance Company contesting the claim, stated that the deceased was responsible for the accident as he was driving at a high speed and collided with the truck head on. Hence, the claim be dismissed.
Judge Vadane observed that the panchnama (spot inspection), filed by the Police, showed that blood stains were found on the left side of rear wheel of the truck, and the motorcycle at a distance of one feet from the rear left side of the four-wheeler.
The Tribunal also observed that from investigations it appears that as impact between motorcycle and truck took place near the left rear wheel, and the impugned accident also occurred due to contributory negligence on part the deceased.
There was 75 per cent negligence on part of the truck driver and 25 per cent contributory negligence on part of the deceased, the Judge observed.