RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT Vs. VIRENDRA KUMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Section 110-D. Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is directed against an award of the Claims Tribunal, Jodhpur dated 26-2-1980 directing the appellant and its driver Gyanchand to pay a sum of Rs. 51,299/- as compensation to the respondent Virendrakumar Singh.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the relevant facts giving rise to this appeal are that Virendrakumar Singh is a registered owner of truck RJL 8835. It was carrying stone-dabs from Jodhpur to Jaipur on 21-10-1974, Nandlal was the employed driver on this truck. He was driving the truck that day, Mukbram (PW 4) was also there in the truck as the second driver. He was sitting by the side of Nandlal. Poonaram Jat was also there in the truck. When the truck reached near Dangiawas. Nandlal noticed bus RRM 618 coming from the opposite direction at a fast speed. Seeing the bus, Nandlal took the truck on the extreme left edge of the road. He completely lowered down the speed of the truck and took it on the Kaccha side track of the road. Gyanchand was driving the bus, The bus belonged to the Corporation. He was driving it so rashly and negligently that it swerved on the right side (wrong side) of the road and dashed against the truck on the Kaccha track. It resulted in a severe and head-on collision between the truck and the bus. As a result, the driver of the truck (Nandlal) and Poonaram passed away instantaneously on the spot. Many persons sitting in the bus also sustained injuries, The impact of the collision was so severe that the truck got completely damaged and the cost of repairs as per estimate given in the application came to Rs. 51,150/- Virendra-kumar Singh presented an application under Section 110-A of the Act before the Tribunal, claiming a sum of Rs. 69,030/-. It was alleged that the accident had taken place due to the rash and negligent driving pf the bus by its driver Gyanchand A sum of Rs. 51,150/- was claimed as costs of repair and a sum of Rs. 17,900/- was claimed as loss of normal daily income at the rate of Rs. 100/- per day from the date of the accident to the date of filing the application.Thus a sum of Rs. 69,050/- was claimed as compensation. The application was opposed by the appellant as well as its driver Gyanchand through separate written statements. Both of them admitted the accident, but denied that it was on account of rash and negligent driving of the bus by its driver Gyanchand. It was pleaded that the accident bad taken place on account of rash and negligent driving of the truck by its driver Nandlal. The quantum of compensation was also challenged. Necessary issues were raised. It may be mentioned that Satya Narain and Chandidan who were travelling in the bus and who had sustained injuries in this accident and Mukbram who was the second-driver in the truck, also presented applications for compensation before the Tribunal. There were, thus four claims before the Tribunal arising out of the same accident. Though they were not consolidated common evidence was recorded in all of them. On the conclusion of trial, the Tribunal held that the accident and collision had taken place on account of the rash and negligent driving of the Corporation bus by its driver Gyanchand. The Tribunal further held that the loss sustained by Virendrakumar Singh on account of damages caused to the truck was of Rs. 51,299. This amount was taken as the costs of repair of the truck. The Tribunal therefore-awarded a sum of Rs. 51,299/- as compensation and directed the appellant and its driver Gyanchand to pay the same to the claimant. Aggrieved against the said award the Corporation has come up in appeal.

(3.) I have beard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully.