J C JOHNSON Vs. RAGHBIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of the appeal filed by the appellants against the judgment of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal whereby the claim application of the appellants claiming compensation for the death of their son in a road accident alleged to have been caused by the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle on 18th February, 1987 was dismissed. The claim application of the appellants was dismissed by the Tribunal on the ground that it could not be proved that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle and consequently the appellants were held not entitled to the grant of any compensation. A few facts relevant for deciding this appeal are :-

(2.) On 18th February, 1987 the deceased along with his friend on the pillion was driving a motorcycle and was going from Panchsheel Park, New Delhi to Som Vihar. It was at about 04.30 pm when the motorcycle was on Venketeshwar Road, R.K.Puram that a bus coming from the opposite direction had head on collision with the motorcycle resulting in the deceased receiving severe injuries which proved fatal. Claiming that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending bus, the appellants filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.20 lacs for the death of their son. The respondents in the written statement denied that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the bus. It was stated that the bus had started from Dhaula Kuan at about 5.00 pm and at about 05.20 pm the bus had reached R.K. Puram Sector-IV when the driver had stopped the bus at the bus stand for the passengers to alight and board the bus. It was stated that after taking the passengers from the bus stand as soon as the driver started the bus a motorcycle with two riders came at a shooting speed and on seeing them coming at a fast speed, the driver of the bus stopped the bus by applying the brakes and at that time he saw the motorcyclist trying to overtake another bus which was coming from the opposite direction but due to the fast speed the motorcyclist could not control his motorcycle and both the riders jumped from the motorcycle and after that the motorcycle came and hit the rear portion of the bus. It was submitted that no accident was caused between the motorcycle and the bus and the respondents were, therefore, not liable to pay any compensation to the family of the deceased. On the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues :-

(3.) While deciding Issue No.1, the Tribunal held that the site plan shows that the bus was coming in its own direction i.e. on the left side and there was a central dividing line on the road to control the traffic coming from both the directions. According to the Tribunal, the motorcyclist was trying to overtake another bus and in the process he went to his right side crossing the central dividing line and the accident occurred on the side on which the bus was being driven. Relying upon the judgment of the Metropolitan Magistrate whereby the driver of the offending bus was acquitted, the Tribunal held that the reasoning given by the Metropolitan Magistrate appeared to be more probable than the evidence given by the eye witness, namely, the pillion rider of the motorcycle. It was held by the Tribunal that while overtaking the bus, the deceased came in touch with the offending bus owned by the respondent and on account of the accident both the motorcyclists fell down on the road and received injuries. The Tribunal, therefore, held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving on the part of the motorcycle driver and not on account of the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending bus. The issue was, accordingly, decided against the appellants. Since it was held that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the motorcycle, the Tribunal came to a finding that the appellants were not entitled to any compensation.