GSRTC Vs. KESHABHAI KHODABHAI KOLI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is against the judgment and award dated 9.4.1996 rendered in M.A.C.P No.104 of 1989 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), II, Ahmedabad, by which the claim petition filed by respondent No.1 claiming compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- on account of the untimely demise of minor son, namely, Bhulabhai who had died in a vehicular accident, has been partly allowed and thereby the respondent No.1 has been awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,40,000/- together with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of application till realisation along with cost. The appellant is Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation and respondent No.1 is original claimant whereas respondent NO.2 is driver of the appellant.

(2.) It was the case of respondent No.1 claimant that on 17.7.1988, his son Bhulabhai was grazing cattle near village Aniyali on Sanand Nalsarovar Road at about 4.00 p.m. At that time, Respondent No.2 who happened to be the driver of the appellant ST Corporation driving the bus, came in a rash and negligent manner and the front wheel of the bus dashed with Bhulabhai and as a result of the same, he died instantaneously. Therefore, the original applicant Respondent No.1 herein, father of the deceased had claimed compensation. It was averred in the claim petition that his deceased son was 15 years of age and though he was illiterate, he was doing the work of grazing cattle and thereby he was earning Rs.1500/- per month and therefore, respondent No.1 had claimed total compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- by way of dependency benefits.

(3.) The claim petition was contested by the ST Corporation by filing written statement at Exh.17 wherein it was categorically denied the averments made by the claimant and contended that the driver was driving the bus with moderate speed and also by observing the Rules and Regulations of the road. Ir was contended that due to monsoon rain, both the sides of the road, there were deep ditches with full of rain water. That the deceased was grazing his cattle on the side of the road. The bus had to pass a high slope and when respondent No.2 was driving the bus at a moderate speed with due diligence, the deceased Bhulabhai ran from behind the Babool trees standing on the side of the road and because of that the accident occurred. So far as the quantum of compensation as claimed by respondent No.1 claimant was concerned, it was submitted that the same was exaggerated and inflated one and on a higher side and therefore, the claim petition deserves to be dismissed.