JAMUNA CHAND Vs. GANESH PRASAD GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal Under Section 110 -D of the Motor Vehicles Act against the award of the Second Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal.

(2.) THE appellant is the widow of deceased Rama Chandra Chand. The deceased was going on his scooter on the date of occurrence and near about the I.T.I., crossing at Rourkela, the bus bearing registration No. OSO 6780 dashed against the scooter as a result of which the deceased died on the spot. This application having been filed before the Tribunal, the Tribunal conducted the inquiry. Before the Tribunal,' two witnesses were; examined on behalf of the claimant and on behalf of the respondents, the driver of the bus who was driving the vehicle was examined as OPW 1. The learned Tribunal on consideration of the evidence before him came to the conclusion that the accident in question occurred not on account of any negligence of the driver of the vehicle but on account of the negligence of the deceased himself and in that view of the matter, he only awarded the statutory compensation of Rs. 15,000/ - Under Section 92 -A of the Motor Vehicles Act. It is this award of the Tribunal that is being impugned in this appeal.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the appellant then urges that the evidence of the driver, OPW 1, itself indicates that he was negligent in driving. I have carefully examined the evidence of the driver and I do not find any merit to the submission of Mr. Mohanty, the learned Counsel for the appellant. The evidence adduced on behalf of the claimant is not at all relatable to the alleged negligence of the driver of the vehicle. On the other hand, the driver of the vehicle examined as OPW I clearly shows that it is the deceased who was responsible for the accident in question. Nothing has been elicited from the cross -examination of the said driver so as to impeach his testimony. On the materials on record, in my view, the Tribunal was wholly justified in coming to the conclusion that the appellant failed to establish any negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle which dashed to scooter on which the deceased was moving on the date of occurrence and accordingly, the award of the Tribunal is unassailable.