D T C Vs. OM PRAKASH VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Delhi Transport Corporation (hereinaftercalled 'DTC') has sought for the reversal of the judgment of the MotorAccidents Claims Tribunal (hereinafter called the 'Tribunal') dated 2 2/02/1980.

(2.) The admitted facts on record are that on 5/02/1993 atabout 3.25 p.m. the deceased Kartar Singh was travelling in private bus No.D.L.P. 3677 under DTC operation. While the said bus was taking a turntowards the Red Fort and entered the crossing of Netaji Subhash Marg nearChhatta Rly. Pul, at that time DTC Bus No. D.L.P. 73 came from JamunaBridge side and entered the crossing. In the process DTC bus No. D.L.P. 73 hit the left side of bus No. D.L.P. 3677. On account of the collision of boththe buses, the deceased who was at the rear gate of bus No. D.L.P. 3677 received grievous injuries. He fell on the road and became unconscious. Hewas removed to the hospital where he succumbed to the injuries. Thedeceased was 18 years old, a student of 11th class and unmarried at the time of the accident. The Tribunal came to the conclusion that it was the driver of DTC bus who struck the rear portion of the bus with the private bus comingto the Kauria Bridge side. The bus No. "D.L.P. 3677 had already crossedmajor portion of the crossing. That the accident occurred due to rash andnegligent driving on the part of the driver of the DTC bus No. D.L.P. 73. Itis against this conclusion of the Tribunal that the present appeal has beenpreferred, challenging the said conclusion, inter alia, on the grounds that the Tribunal erroneously placed reliance on the FIR rather than the sworn testimony of Public Witness 7. The decision of the Tribunal is against claimant's own casei.e. was composite negligence. Similarly the Tribunal without discussing theevidence placed on record awarded the compensation.

(3.) Admittedly, in the claim petition, the claimant had attributed thenegligence to the driver of both the buses. They had pleaded that the accident was on account of the composite negligence of the driver of the bus No.D.L.P. 73 as well as bus No. D.L.P. 3677. The claimant had asserted thatdeceased Kartar Singh died due to the composite negligence of respondents1 to 4 and they were vicariously liable. DTC in its written statement haddenied that there was any negligence on the part of its driver. However, nowritten statement on behalf of its driver Sant Lal has been filed. ExceptDTC and the New India Assurance Co. (respondent No. 5) no other respondent filed the written statement.