UTKARSHA BUILDERS Vs. MADHVIBEN ANILKUMAR KARIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL these first appeals have been filed by the original opponents including Insurance Company being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the common judgment and award dated 5-5-1997 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Main), Surendranagar, in 20 claim petitions. However, Cross Objection No.203 of 1998 in First Appeal No.2819 of 1997 has been filed by one of the claimants for enhancement of compensation.

(2.) FACTS in short are that 20 claim petitions arose out of the same accident which occurred on 25th December, 1985 at about 2.45 a.m. on Surendranagar-Rajkot Highway near Dolia Milestone No.6 when there was a head-on collision between ST bus No.GRU-6900 and truck No.GTF-2712 causing fatal injuries to eight persons including driver of ST bus and injuries to other persons. One claim petition was also filed by ST Corporation for damages caused to ST bus. Upon hearing the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considering the oral as well as documentary evidence on record, the impugned common judgment and award was passed by the Tribunal.

(3.) LEARNED advocate, Mr.Parikh for Mr.Mehta submitted that considering FIR and deposition of P.W.Nos.3 and 17, it is prima facie established that both the vehicles i.e. truck and bus were in full speed and collided with each other and so, both the vehicle drivers were negligent for causing the accident. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal has not considered the evidence of these two witnesses in correct perspective and on conjectures and surmises came to the conclusion that driver of the truck is solely negligent for causing the accident. He further submitted that it was narrated in last line of FIR that as both the vehicle drivers did not apply brake, the incident in question took place and learned Tribunal has not considered this fact and thereby committed error in holding that only truck driver was negligent for causing the accident. He further submitted that ST bus driver was dismissed from service as he allowed the other driver who was not on duty to drive the bus. He placed reliance on the case of Bijoy Kumar Dugar Vs. Bidyadhar Dutta and others reported in 2006 ACJ page 1058.