Punjab State and another vs Jaswant Kaur and others

C.G. Suri, J.—The State of Punjab has filed this appeal against an award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal under the following circumstances:--

On 2nd October 1969, Punjab Roadways Bus No. PNP 2910 plying on Delhi Jammu route was nearing Ambala Cantt. between 10-11 A.M. When it was still 5 or 6 miles short of the cantonment, there was an impact of the bus with a cyclist who was going in the same direction on the left side of the road. The cyclist, Shri Godar Singh, was carrying heavy agricultural implements, made of iron, on the pillion of his cycle. Shri Godar Singh was knocked down and sustained serious injury to which he succumbed the same day in the hospital. The bus had stopped at a distance of about 25 paces from the scene of the accident.

An entry Exhibit R 1/1 narrating the occurrence was made by one of the passengers in the complaint book in the custody of the bus conductor, Shri Mohinder Kumar, R.W.1. The entry was signed by 14 bus passengers, all of whom were inclined to give a clean chit to the bus driver, Shri Resham Singh R.W.2 and to hold the cyclist responsible for the accident. Shri Data Ram A.W.1, the chowkidar of the nearby village Mohra, lodged a report with the police within an hour or two. According to this chowkidar and some other witnesses examined by the dependants of the deceased who had filed this claim u/s 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act, the accident was due to the rash and negligent driving of Shri Resham Singh R.W.2 He was described to have been coming at a very fast speed and to have given very insufficient berth to the cyclist while overtaking him. The case of the bus driver, how-ever, was that the cyclist had suddenly emerged out of a kacha path (pagdandl) coming from the left side of the road and had tried to cross the road at that point. Because of the sudden appearance of the cyclist right in the middle of the road, the bus driver could not stop the vehicle in time even though he was going at the normal speed of 25-30 miles per hour. Shri Bindra, the learned counsel for the claimant respondents had brought to my notice that the bus driver had been challaned by the police u/s 304A, Indian Penal Code, and that he had made a confession of his guilt in the Criminal Court. The findings of the Criminal Court would not, however, be relevant in these proceedings in a Civil Court where the question of apportionment of the blame has also to be decided in order to determine the quantum of compensation to be allowed to the dependants of the deceased.

A chowkidar would generally be attending to his duties in the village and is not expected to be waiting by a road side to witness an accident of this type. It was a part of his duties to report the accident at the police station. The claimants had also examined as an eye-witness of the accident a cousin of the deceased who was supposed to be working inside a factory at the time of the day. It is obvious that the testimony of such witnesses cannot be described as natural and is rather hard to believe. There would, however, be no reason to disbelieve Jaswant Singh A.W.2 who was not related or previously known to the deceased or his family. He slates that the bus was coming at a fast speed are had kiceked down the cyclist going in the same direction on his left side of the road. The fact that the cyclist was carrying bulky agricultural implements on the carrier of his cycle is admitted by this witness as well as by the chowkidar. The bus driver was, however, supposed to give a wider berth to a cyclist carrying bulky loads on the pillion. A poor man who tries to make full use of the conveyance which he can afford cannot be treated as fair game by any rash and negligent driver of a public vehicle. The passengers in a bus that had to cover such a long route would naturally be keen that the accident should not hold them up for long and that could be one reason why 14 of them had subscribed their hand to the entry Exhibit R. 1/1 in the complaint book in the custody of the bus conductor. The person who had made this entry has not been examined. The appellants have, however, examined two of these bus passengers, one of whom is the Deputy Director of Education in Jammu & Kashmir Government while the other is a Private Secretary to the Vice-Chancellor of University at Jammu. The plan prepared by the police of the scene of accident has not, however, been proved in the case and 1 am not in a position to say whether there really is a pagdandi or path coming from the left side on that particular point in the road. Anyhow, the apportionment of blame in the ratio of 1:3 over the cyclist and the bus driver by the learned Tribunal may appear to be quite fair. A cyclist who carries heavy and bulky loads on his pillion would naturally have an unstable equilibrium. The slightest impact could have put the cyclist out of balance and the circumstance could have contributed appreciably to the serious consequences that followed.

As regards the quantum of damages, the deceased was dependent mainly on his land. The land has not been taken away from the dependents but they have been deprived of the person who could effectively utilise it. The deceased who was aged about 55 years of age has left behind widow and six minor children. The eldest child is a on who was about 15-16 years of age at the time of the accident. It would not be long before he can take to the normal family avocations of cultivation of the land. The income from the land would have one less mouth to feed and it cannot be said that the respondents'' monthly loss would be a two-third share of the income of this land. The learned Tribunal had been pleased to award the respondents a sum of Rs. 22, 950/- as compensation for the loss of the bread winner of the family. The source of the bread is still with the family and one of the heirs should now be in a position to get the maximum produce possible out of the land. A sum of Rs. 15,000/- as damages should, therefore, be ample compensation to the family.

I, therefore, partly accept this appeal and reduce the compensation amount to Rs. 15,000/- parties to bear their own costs.