Saturday, April 20, 2024
HomeCity NewsMACT awards Rs. 90 lakh compensation to engineers family

MACT awards Rs. 90 lakh compensation to engineers family

- Advertisement -

An insurance company and a two-wheeler rider have been directed by District Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) to pay Rs. 90 lakh to the family of a software engineer, who died in a road accident in 2007.

MACT awards-AV

The judgement was delivered on Monday by Additional Sessions Judge Mridula V K Bhatia, after the court was given the powers of tribunal, recently.

The judge directed Tribhuvan P Vishwakarma, owner of Bajaj M-80 scooter, and United India Insurance Co Ltd to jointly make the payment to the family of deceased Gopal Kanhaiyalal Mohta (then aged 32), a resident of Vartak Nagar here.

Appearing of behalf of the claimants, P M Tillu told the Tribunal that Mohta was a computer science engineer and employed with Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) as assistant consultant since August, 1997. He drew a salary of Rs 1.07 lakh per month.

On March 31, 2007, Mohta was travelling on his two-wheeler from Laxmi Nagar to his home when another two-wheeler, driven at a high speed and in a negligent manner, dashed into the latters bike, injuring him grievously, Tillu said.

The victim was rushed to a nearby hospital where he succumbed to injuries during treatment on April 4. The family then lodged a claim of Rs 2 crore with the MACT.

The owner of the scooter, Vishwakarma, in his submission, told the Tribunal that his vehicle was insured and hence the insurance company was liable to pay the compensation and not him. He argued that the deceased died due to his sole negligence.

Tillu argued that the scooter driver had committed breach of section 134 of Motor vehicle Act and was totally negligent, which that could be inferred from the fact that he went home after the accident instead of reporting it to the police or rendering medical help to the injured.

Vishwakarma drove on the wrong side of the road while overtaking another vehicle and later collided with the deceaseds vehicle, and hence, there was no contributory negligence, he argued.

- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -

Latest

Must Read

- Advertisement -

Related News