SANTHI Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR CHOLAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Courts are not expected to approach the case of the accident with an opinion that it would have been only that he driver of the vehicle which hit the victim, had driven the vehicle in a rtash and negligent manner. Such a kind of approach by the Court is nothing but perverse. A Court or Tribunal is expected to apply its mind to the entire evidence both oral and documentary and then only come to the conclusion as to the actual position that had been in existence during the time of the impact and then the act of the driver of the vehicle in question. In the instant case, the petitioner minor Santhi, aged 5 at the time of the occurrence represented by her next friend and father Murugaiyan that on 9-2-1978 by about 12.45 p.m. the petitioner appellant herein was walking along with her grandmother Manickavalli on the left side of the Bazaar Road in Poon-thottam village of Nannilara Taluk, that the second respondent before the Tribunal, Raghavan, was driving the bus MSQ 2437, that the said bus came at a high speed without sounding horn and the back wheel of the bus ran over the left leg of the petitioner, that on account of this accident, grievous injury was caused to the petitioner/appellant herein and that the same has resulted in permanent disability of the appellant The left leg was completely crushed and the petitioner/appellant herein is not able to walk. The accident had occurred only on account of the rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by the driver. The first respondent before the Tribunal is the employer as well as the owner of the vehicle involved in the accident. The petitioner/appellant herein had incurred Rs. 350/- towards transport charges to the hospital ; Rs. 50/- represented damages to clothing articles ; Rs. 1,000/-was spent for extra nourishment; Rs. 2000/- was payable as compensation for pain and suffering. A sum of Rs. 21,600/- is payable as compensation for the permanent disability caused. Thus the petitioner/appellant herein is entitled to get a total sum of Rs. 25,000/- as compensation from the respondents before the Tribunal.

(2.) THE first respondent, Managing Director, Cholan Roadways Corporation, Kutnbakonam, had filed a counter which has been adopted by the second respondent, the driver of the vehicle MSQ 2437, before the Tribunal to the following effect.

(3.) IN this Court, C.M.P. No. 13226 of 1987 in C.M.A. No. 300 of 1982 has been filed to receive documents as additional evidence in this appeal. The points that arise for consideration in this appeal are: