R.S.R.T.C. Vs. GUDDI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed against the judgment and award dated 15.9.2004 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhadra (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') in claim Case No. 43/2003 (65/ 2002) whereby a compensation of Rs. 1,84,000/ - was awarded to the respondents No. 1 and 2 (claimants). Brief facts of the case are that the respondents No. 1 and 2 filed a claim petition before the Tribunal while alleging that on 18.7.2002 their son Rajendra was driving jeep No. HR 16 C 1412 on Bhirani to Bhadra road where a Roadways Bus No. RJ 13 P 2144 came with high speed and bumped into the jeep driven by Rajender. The occupants of jeep No. HR 16 C 1412 Rajender and Mangi Lal received serious injuries in the said accident and on account of that both died. The claim petition was preferred against the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, bus driver, jeep owner and Insurance Company with which the jeep was insured. The claim was contested on behalf of the appellants and the driver of the bus. The owner of the jeep had filed written statement and claimed that the accident took place on account of mistake of bus driver. The respondent -Insurance Company has also claimed that the accident took place due to mistake of bus driver. On the basis of pleadings, the Tribunal has framed as many as 5 issues. While deciding the issue No. 1, the learned Tribunal has given a finding that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the bus driver and while deciding the other issues, has awarded the compensation of Rs. 1,84,000/ - in favour of respondents No. 1 and 2.

(2.) THE only contention raised on behalf of the learned counsel for appellant is that the learned Tribunal has committed an error while deciding the issue No. 1 and has wrongly held that the accident look place on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of bus No. RJ 13 P 2144. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the learned Tribunal has given finding to this effect solely on the basis of statements of AW -1 Ghudi and AW -2 Kurda Ram, whereas it was admitted position that both these witnesses were not present at the time of accident, and in view of this, their testimony has no value. It is also argued that the accident, in which son of respondents No. 1 and 2 died, had taken place on account of mistake of deceased himself and, therefore, the bus driver has wrongly been held responsible for the accident. It is prayed on behalf of the appellants that the judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal dated 15.9.2004 in claim Case No. 43/2003 (65/2002) may be quashed and set aside.

(3.) THIS Court has considered the rival submissions and perused the judgment and award dated 15.9.2004.