STATE OF MADRAS Vs. JAMES APPADURAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the decree and judgment of the learned subordinate Judge of Coimbatore in O. S. No. 24 of 1952.

(2.) THE plaintiff is the son of a carpenter who has studied unto the fourth class. His elder brother is a cleaner earning Rs. 30 a month. The plaintiff also wanted to become a fitter and the selling of ice fruit by him, was apparently only a temporary job till the plaintiff reached sufficient age to join the St. Michael's workshop to learn the fitter's job. In these circumstances on the date of the occurrence, viz. , 10 a. m. , on 16-7-1950, the plaintiff after returning from Church was sitting on the culvert near the main gate of the Forest College with one of his legs folded and resting on it and his other leg hanging down. Then a bus bearing M. D. C. 3967 belonging to the Arthur Hope's College of technology, now known as the Government College of Technology, crossed this culvert near main gate of the Forest College, Coimbatore. There is no dispute that this bus was driven so rashly and negligently that it dashed against the culvert and hit the plaintiffs left leg, which was hanging down, and severed it below the knee, thereby causing the plaintiff very serious injuries. The plaintiff fell down unconscious after the incident and he was taken to the government Headquarters hospital, Coimbatore, where he was treated as an inpatient for a period of 35 days. At the hospital his left leg below the knee has been amputated and he is now moving about with crutches with difficulty. The government bus driver charged under Section 338, I. P. C. , was convicted and sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment.

(3.) IN these circumstances, the plaintiff on the foot that he had become permanently incapacitated and that he is unable to go about his normal business, and much less to do any work, and that this was due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus by the second defendant, a servant of the first defendant, in the course of his employment as such seivant, filed the suit out of which this appeal arises, in the pauper form for recovery of Rs. 23,180, from the defendants by way of damages.