APSRTC REP Vs. R BATTAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the A.P.State Road Transport Corporation, Hyderabad ('the Corporation' for brevity) against the order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District Judge, Tirupathi ('the tribunal' for brevity) in

(2.) The claiman by name R.Bhattaiah aged 49 years, an employee of TJrumala Tirupathi Devasthanams met with a motor vehicle accident on 29-1-1996 and received fracture to this left leg and multiple injuries all over the body. He underwent treatmentinS.V.R.R. Hospital, Tirupathi and Apollo Hospital, Madras. Due to the fracture of the left leg there was shortening to an extent of 2". The claimant mentioned in the petition that the accident occurred with an RTC bus while he was walking on a road along with his friend. No crime was registered, therefore, there was no investigation regarding the manner of accident or the vehicle which caused the accident. The driver of the alleged bus was not prosecuted. The accident occurred on 29-1-1996 at bout 5-45 p.m. near Mopeds Factory on Tirupathi-Renugunta main road. For the first time after the accident the claimant issued a legal notice to the appellant on 4-12-1996 i.e., about 10 months after the date of accident claiming compensation for the disabilite suffered by him due to the accident. But, since the appellant did not pay any compensation, the claimant filed the petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- for the disability caused to him due to the injuries received by him in the accident.

(3.) The appellant Corporation being the respondent in the petition denied the accident as alleged by petitioner. The petitioner alleged that an RTC bus bearing Registration No. AP9Z 2515 caused the accident whereas the respondent contended that the bus bearing the above registration number belongs to Guntakal Depot of Anantapur District and it was operated on the route Guntakal to janardhanapalli on the alleged date of accident and it was not operated to Tirupathi on 29-1-1996, therefore, the respondent is not liable to pay compensation to the petitioner.