Smt. Shanti @APPELLANT@Hash Shanker Lal

This Civil Misc. Appeal under sec.173 of the Motor Vehicles Act has been filed against judgment dated 23.03.2002 passed by the Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal, Nagaur in MACT Case No.38/1996 {Shanti Devi & others vs. Shanker Lal & others), whereby the learned Judge has dismissed

claim petition of the appellants.

Brief facts of the case are that on the fateful day of 24.06.1996, deceased Ramswaroop (husband of appellant No.1) was travelling from Ladnun to

Nagaur in a bus No.RJV 1859. It was rainy season and as such, respondent No.1 Shanker Lal (driver of the bus) allowed the passengers to go on

roof of the bus. Deceased Ramswaroop climbed on roof of the bus. When the bus reached about 1 kms ahead of village Nimbi towards Nagaur at

about 9:30AM, Ramswaroop fell down from the roof of the bus and sustained severe head injury. He was immediately taken to Government hospital,

Ladnun for treatment. Thereafter, on 25.06.1996, Karni Singh, husband of respondent No.2 (owner of the bus) lodged a report at Police Station,

Ladnun giving complete detail of the accident and accordingly, an FIR No.143/1996 was registered against the respondent No.1 Shanker Lal for

offence under secs.279, 304 IPC. After investigation, Police filed challan against the driver Shanker Lal.

The appellants filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nagaur. The respondents contested the claim and took stand that a

dead body was found near the road when the bus reached near village Nimbi and emphatically denied any accident by the bus driven by Shanker Lal

himself. The appellants examined two witnesses in support of their claim and produced 9 documents. On completion of the evidence, learned Judge,

MACT Nagaur passed judgment dated 23.03.2002, whereby claim petition of the appellants was dismissed. Being aggrieved by the judgment dated

23.03.2002, the appellants have preferred this appeal on various grounds.

It was contended that the learned Tribunal has not considered and has failed to appreciate the FIR No.143/1996 registered at Police Station, Ladnun

lodged by owner Karni Singh. It was also contended that the learned Tribunal has committed error in holding that alleged accident has not taken place

from the bus driven by respondent No.1 Shanker Lal and as such, there was no question of entitlement of appellant-claimants to get compensation

from the respondents. It was further contended that the FIR itself goes to show that the accident did occur on 24.06.1996 and deceased Ramswaroop

fell down from the bus resulting into his death, therefore, there remains no doubt about the accident by said bus and the claim of the appellants

deserves to be allowed for the amount claimed.

In the context of contentions raised by the appellants perused the pleadings and evidence placed on record.

AW1 Shanti Devi appeared in the witness box and stated that her husband fell down from the bus driven by Shanker Lal, the bus-driver respondent

No.1 and placed on record FIR No.143/1996, postmortem report, naksha mauka report, halamauka report, driving license and other relevant

documents as Exhibits 1 to 9. She admitted in her cross-examination that she is not an eye-witness. AW2 Om Prakash appeared in the witness box

and he showed himself as an eye-witness of the incident and stated that Ramswaroop was known to him. He further stated that they were travelling

in the bus and when they reached 1 kms ahead from village Nimbi, at that time driver was driving the bus rashly & negligently and Ramswaroop fell

down, the passengers from the bus got down and took injured Ramswaroop to hospital in the same bus. In his cross-examination, he admitted that the

Police did not take his statement. He further stated that he was sitting behind the driver and where Ramswaroop was sitting he had no knowledge. He

further stated that he do not know whether any other passenger was also injured besides Ramswaroop. No other witness appeared in this case.

From the evidence of this case, it can not be inferred where Ramswaroop was sitting in the bus. The witness Om Prakash (AW2) has not stated that

Ramswaroop was sitting on roof of the bus and therefore, he fell down. He has not stated that Ramswaroop was standing at the gate of the bus and

fell down on account of sudden jerk. Admittedly, Ramswaroop was well known to this witness but he was knowing nothing as to where the deceased

was sitting in the bus. The trial court has properly appreciated the evidence of this witness.

It is important to note that in Ex.4 injury report, name of injured person is written Unknown ( ukekywq e) and in the postmortem report Ex.P3 also,

name of the injured deceased was written as Unknown; which shows that up to time when injury report Ex.P4 and postmortem report Ex.P3 were

prepared, till that time no known person was there who could identify the injured deceased. From this, it can not be inferred that AW2 Om Prakash

was an eye-witness. From the statement of NAW2 Gulab, who stated himself to be an eye-witness, who stated that he was travelling in the bus and

one kilometer from village Nimbi one person was seen lying on the road. On seeing that person, the bus, which was driven by Shanker Lal, was

stopped and on the request of passengers, that injured person was taken to hospital. NAW3 Bhanwaroo also supported the statement of NAW2.

After appreciating the evidence, the learned Tribunal rightly decided the issues against appellant-claimants. There is no ground to interfere with the

judgment under appeal.

The appeal is dismissed.