Bhai Shamsher Singh and Another vs Punjab State and Others

S.S. Sodhi, J.—On December 3, 1974 there was an accident between a Punjab Roadways bus (PUK 2413) and an Ambassador car (DHC 5533) on the Amritsar-Harike road, this was a head-on collision between the two vehicles. All the occupants of the car were killed in this accident, they being Rajinder Singh, his wife Mrs. Ravinder Kaur and then-servant Sukhdev Singh.

The Tribunal held this to be a case of contributory negligence with both the bus driver as also die car driver to be equally to blame for the accident. A sum of Rs. 36,000/- was awarded as compensation to the parents of Rajinder Singh, deceased and another Rs. 4,000/- to the parents of his wife Mrs. Ravinder Kaur. To the brothers and sister of Sukhdev Singh a sum of Rs. 6,750/- was awarded as compensation.

In appeal, an attempt was in the first instance made to challenge the finding of contributory negligence recorded against Rajinder Singh, deceased. The argument being that the manner in which the accident took place, the blame for it lay wholly upon the bus driver.

The case, as pleaded in the claim application was, that the bus which was coming from the opposite direction, that is, from die side of Harike came at a very fast speed on the wrong side of the road and hit into the car. The version of the Respondents, on the other hand was, that the accident occurred due to the negligent driving of the car driver. It being stated that the road was slippery as it had been raining and there was a curve in the road where the accident occurred. The car was being driven at a fast speed and the driver thereof could not control it and as a result die car went and hit into the bus, despite die fact that die vehicle was being taken to the left side of die road on seeing the car. It was also said that Rajinder Singh did not hold a valid driving licence.

The claimants examined two eyewitnesses with regard to this accident. They being AW 8 Sat Pal on whose instance the First Information Report in this case was recorded; while AW 15 Nihal Singh stated that he was travelling in the bus involved in the accident. The conductor of the bus AW 9 Amar Singh had also been examined, but he stated that he had not seen the occurrence as he was issuing tickets at that time. The Respondents on die other hand examined Dildar Singh as RW 1 besides the bus driver Maluk Singh as RW 2. Dildar Singh stated that he was also a passenger travelling in die bus, but he stands falsified by the fact that die car involved in die accident was an Ambassador while he deposed that it was a Fiat. As regards Maluk Singh die bus driver, he introduced a new version for die first time in court namely, that the car driver had brought the car to wrong side of die road while trying to save a lady crossing we road. No such version had been put forth in die written statement and this was thus, clearly an after thought.

What emerges from reading of die testimony of die witnesses here is mat die metalled portion of die road, where die accident took place, was not wide enough to permit two vehicles to pass. The collision between the bus and the car took place on die metalled portion of die road. The photographs taken after die accident would suggest that both the vehicles were travelling in die middle of the road at that time. It is also apparent that despite it being a straight road, no attempt was made by either the bus driver or the driver of the car to give way to the other vehicle to avoid the accident. In this situation, the only conclusion possible was die one drawn by the Tribunal namely, that this was a case of contributory negligence.

The main prayer in appeal was for enhancement of compensation awarded to die claimants. Rajinder Singh, deceased, was engaged in the business of running an agency for the sale of tractor along with a service station. This business was being run as a family partnership, where die deceased had a 25 per cent share. Evidence shows that it was Rajinder Singh, who was managing this business.

The claimants, who are die parents of Rajinder Singh, deceased, also led evidence with a view to show the turn over and income of the partnership in which the deceased was the working partner. The stress here being upon the figures for the year 1974-75. According to AW 13 H.S. Bhullar of die Income Tax Department, this firm was assessed at Rs. 1,83,930/- with the income being Rs. 45,689/- during the year 1974-75. In die next year the income for the first period, April 1, 1974 to December 3, 1974 (when the deceased died) was Rs. 53,598/- , but in the remaining period of that financial year, that is, December 4, 1974 to March 31, 197?, there was loss to the extent of Rs. 7,612/- . It was on the basis of this evidence, that the argument was raised that what had been a flourishing concern became a losing one after the death of Rajinder Singh.

In the case like the present, what requires to be established is not only what was the income of the deceased during his life time, but also and more important, what was the extent of the loss suffered by the claimants on account of his death. In other words, to what extent, if any, can the loss of income be attributed to the death of the deceased. It is here that the evidence led is at its weakest. Income in an agency like the one, being run by the claimants, was dependent largely upon the number of tractors available with it for sale besides the general market conditions which vary according to various circumstances governing it. An efficient Manager can, of course, help in maximising profits, but that cannot by itself be taken to be the sole determining factor governing the fortunes of a business. Here, it has come on record, that there was a significant fall in number of tractors supplied to this firm for sale. There is, however, no material on record to show that this fall in number was in any way connected with the death of deceased.

An aspect of the case, not without significance here, is the fact that Rajinder Singh, deceased, had no qualifications, educational or professional to boast of. He was only an under matriculate.

In considering the situation of the claimants generally, after the death of then-son Rajinder Singh, it is incumbent upon the court to take an over all view of the matter namely, balancing of the losses that they may have suffered on account of the deceased with the gains that accrued to them thereby. The reference here is to the fact that the deceased died leaving behind 30 acres of land as also 25 per cent share in the partnership referred to above. It is the claimants, who being the nearest heirs of the deceased inherited both these properties. In this situation, no enhancement of compensation awarded to the claimants is warranted.

Mr. R.S. Bindra, counsel for the claimants next addressed himself to the award of Rs. 4,000/- as compensation to the parents of Ravinder Kaur, deceased. It was argued here that according to the evidence on record, the death of Ravinder Kaur preceded that of Rajinder Singh and consequently Rajinder Singh became entitled to inherit what would pass on to upon her death. The claimants being the nearest heirs of Ravinder Kaur''s heir i.e., Rajinder Singh, this amount too fell to then-share and the parents of Ravinder Kaur were not entitled to it. This position does indeed appear to be correct and consequently it must be held that no amount is payable to the parents of Ravinder Kaur as compensation and that the entire compensation in this case, namely, Rs. 40,000/- is payable only to the parents of Rajinder Singh, deceased.

Turning to the appeal filed by the claimants in the case arising from the death of Sukhdev Singh, counsel for the Appellants was not able to put forth any ground warranting any enhancement in the compensation awarded. A matter not without significance here being the fact that the claimants were only the brothers and sister of the deceased.

The Tribunal in awarding compensation to the claimants had erred in not awarding interest thereon from the date of application till the date of its payment. It is accordingly ordered that the claimants in both these appeals shall be entitled to the amount awarded along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of the application to the date of the payment of the amount awarded.

It is to this extent, therefore, that both the appeals, that is, of the parents of Rajinder Singh deceased and the brothers and sister of Sukhdev Singh deceased, are hereby accepted. There will, however, be no order as to costs.