Rajasthan Roadways vs Harpal Singh and Another

G.P. Mittal, J.—The Appellant Rajasthan Roadways impugns a judgment dated 09.07.2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal(the Claims Tribunal) whereby a compensation of Rs. 41,336/- was awarded in favour of the First Respondent for having suffered injuries

in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 18.02.2001. A Claim Petition filed u/s 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act(the Act) by the First

Respondent was converted to one u/s 166 of the Act by the Claims Tribunal on the ground that u/s 163A of the Act, the compensation is payable

only in case of death and permanent disablement. On appreciation of evidence, the Claims Tribunal found that the First Respondent suffered injury

while travelling in Rajasthan Roadways bus No. RJ-13-P-1402 which was being driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner.

The Appellant disputes the finding on negligence on the ground that in the initial Claim Petition preferred by the First Respondent, he sought to

set up a case that he was travelling in a truck which met with an accident with the Appellant''s bus No. RJ-13-P-1402.

I have perused the Trial Court record. It is true that initially in the Claim Petition filed in the year 2001, it was stated that the First Respondent

was travelling in a truck No. HR-14-4393. The Claim Petition was later on amended (in the year 2004) and it was stated that the First

Respondent was travelling in the offending bus. The First Respondent even produced a bus ticket Ex. P-35 as proof of his travelling in the

Rajasthan Roadways bus. It was nowhere the case of the Appellant that the passenger ticket Ex. P-35 was not a genuine document. In the

circumstances, the Claims Tribunal rightly concluded that the Appellant was travelling in the Rajasthan Roadways bus.

Coming to the finding on negligence reached by the Claims Tribunal, the First Respondent''s testimony as PW1 that ""driver of the bus suddenly

turned the bus towards right without caring for the truck coming from the opposite direction. Consequently, the bus hit the truck. As a result of

accident, my ankle dislocated and I also suffered fracture of leg besides other injuries. Other passengers also suffered injuries,"" was not challenged

in cross-examination except for a mere suggestion that the accident was caused due to negligence on the part of the truck driver. It was not

suggested to PW1 as to how the accident occurred. The First Respondent''s version is supported by the certified copy of the site plan filed before

the Trial Court which shows that the Rajasthan Roadways bus had gone to the wrong side of the road to collide against truck No. HR-14-4393.

Culpable negligence on the part of the driver of the Rajasthan Roadways was amply proved.

Thus, the Appeal is devoid of any merit; the same is accordingly dismissed.

The compensation awarded shall be disbursed in favour of the First Respondent in terms of the order passed by the Claims Tribunal.

Statutory amount of Rs. 25,000/- shall be refunded to the Appellant Rajasthan Roadways. Pending Applications stand disposed of.