RAJENDRA SWARUP SHARMA Vs. DELHI TRANSPORT UNDERTAKING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Meerut, dated March 19, 1975, dismissing the appellant's claim petition filed under Section 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.

(2.) Rajendra Swarup Sharma, appellant, received multiple injuries in the accident that took place on October 12, 1969, at 7.20 A.M. on G. T. Road near PWD Inspection Bungalow atGhaziabad. According to the allegations contained in the claim petition, the appellant was proceeding on foot to M/s. Mohan Meakins Breweries, Mohan Nagar, where he was employed. A stage carriage No. DLP 1327, belonging to the Delhi Transport Undertaking, was proceeding from Ghaziabad to Delhi, it was driven in rash and negligent manner as a result of which it hit the appellant hard which resulted in serious multiple injuries to him. The appellant was taken to Irwin Hospital, New Delhi. Later on he was shifted to ESI Dispensary, Ghaziabad. The claimant lodged first information report with the Station Officer, Ghaziabad, on December 13, 1969, after his discharge from the hospital. The appellant ultimately filed a claim petition under Section 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act, hereinafter referred to as " the Act ", claiming compensation for an amount of Rs. 40,000 against the Delhi State Transport Undertaking. The Delhi Transport Undertaking contested the appellant's claim petition. In its written statement, it asserted that the bus was not being driven in rash and negligent manner and the bus did not hit the appellant. According to its plea as set tip in the written statement, it was asserted that while the bus was on its way from Ghaziabad to Delhi, it slowed down on account of heavy traffic; the appellant made an effort to board the bus while it was in motion but he could not maintain his balance as a result of which his left foot slipped and he fell on the road and received injuries on account of his fall on hard surface. The driver stopped the bus immediately when some of the passengers shouted ; the claimant thereafter boarded the bus. The driver, out of sheer sympathy took the appellant to hospital. It was further pleaded that the appellant was not entitled to any compensation as he had himself given in writing that the accident had not taken place on account of rash and negligent driving; instead, he himself was at fault.

(3.) The claim petition was filed beyond time but on an application made by the appellant, the Tribunal condoned the delay and treated the claim petition within time. But on merits, the Tribunal held that the accident did not take place due to rash and negligent driving of the driver as alleged by the appellant, rather it took place due to the fact that the appellant himself made an attempt to board the bus when it was in motion and he lost his balance and fell down. The injuries recieved by the appellant were not on account of any rash and negligent driving of the bus. The Tribunal further held that the appellant had himself immediately after the accident made a written application to the Depot Manager of the Delhi Transport Undertaking stating therein that he received injuries as he made an effort to board the bus while it was in motion, and either the driver or the conductor was not responsible for the injuries received by him. In view of this writing the appellant was not entitled to turn round and blame the driver for the injuries received by him. On these findings, the claim petition was dismissed in its entirety.