MINOR AMRUT DHARMSHIBHAI Vs. GHANSHYAMBHAI TAPUBHA JADEJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Advocate Mr. MA Parekh for appellants and Ms. Roopal Patel, learned Advocate for respondent NO. 2 Corporation.

(2.) BY filing this appeal, appellants have challenged common judgment and award made by MACT (Main) Ahmedabad Rural, Navrangpura at Ahmedabad in so far as it relates to MACP No. 1004 of 1989. Two claim petitions being MACP No. 792/89 and MACP No. 1004/89 arising from same accident were filed before claims tribunal and were decided by claims tribunal by common judgment wherein claims tribunal dismissed both claim petitions on the basis of finding on issue no. 1 alone, without examining issue no. 2 in respect of quantum of compensation, while ordering that applicants of claim petition no. 1004 of 1989 are entitled to interim compensation at Rs. 25000. 00 with interest at 9 per cent per annum from date of interim application Exh. 27 till realization under No Fault Liability and said award was ordered to be satisfied after deducting court fee stamps equally between applicants no. 2 and 3 and opponent no. 3 cannot be apportioned amount as he is not legal heir of deceased. Opponent no. 1 driver of ST Bus was subsequently deleted by claimants and claims tribunal held that in absence of driver, ST Corporation cannot be held liable vicariously and, therefore, on that issue alone, claims tribunal dismissed claim petitions. Therefore, appellants original claimants in claim petition no. 1004 have challenged said award by filing this appeal.

(3.) LOOKING to facts emerging from record, on 20. 4. 1989 deceased Vallabhbhai Dhanjibhai and deceased Bhagwanbhai Parsotambhai were in Barvala ST Bus Stand at about 9. 00 p. m. and they were standing at one side in open space of stand waiting for bus for Surat. At about 10. 15 p. m. , when Vallabhbhai and Bhagwanbhai were sitting on the ground and Jitendrabhai and Babubhai who were accompanying to them were standing, deleted opponent no. 1 brought ST Bus bearing No. GRU. 9108 from workshop and started to drive said bus rashly and negligently in high speed in compound of bus stand and because of such driving, he lost control over bus and bus came towards passengers who were waiting for bus and bus ran over deceased Vallabhbhai and Bhagwanbhai and Jitendrabhai and Babubhai were thrown away wherein Vallabhbhai and Bhagwanbhai sustained injuries and succumbed to same. Initially, opponent no. 1 was joined as driver of offending ST Bus but subsequently, opponent no. 1 was deleted. While examining issue no. 1, claims tribunal held that it is proved that accident is result of rash and negligent driving of bus by deleted driver and, therefore, issue no. 1 was answered accordingly but thereafter, claims tribunal held that ST Corportion is owner of offending bus but they are not vicariously liable to satisfy claim, only Ghanshyamsinh Tapubha Jadeja means deleted opponent no. 1 is liable to satisfy claim but since claimants have deleted opponent no. 1, claims tribunal is unable to pass award on point of quantum and hence dismissed claim petitions. Therefore, claim petition no. 1004 of 1989 was filed by heirs and legal representatives of deceased Vallabhbhai claiming compensation of Rs. 10,00,000. 00 while claim petition no. 792 of 1989 was filed by heirs and legal representatives of deceased Bhagwanbhai for compensation of Rs. 6,00,000. 00 which were consolidated and decided by common judgment which is under challenge in this appeal at the instance of claimants in claim petition no. 1004 of 1989.