CHOTUDI AND OTHERS Vs. GANPAT RAM AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Claimants-appellants filed a motor accident claim on account of the death of Shri Shiv Bux in an accident that took place on 11th Feb., 1986. It has been stated that the deceased Shiv Bux was going in a Roadways bus No. RRG-5862 from Sikar to Dujod. Conductor asked Re. 1.50 as fare of the bus from the deceased, but, he stated that the fare of the bus from Sikar to Dujod was only Re. 1.00. Conductor was furious and suddenly opened gate of the running bus as the deceased was standing near the gate of the overloaded bus. He fell down out of the bus and was run over by the rear wheel as a result of which, he died. The learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sikar, (for short the Tribunal) has held that the appellants were entitled to a compensation of Rs. 1,04,000.00, but, it rejected the claim petition because according to the learned Tribunal, the accident did not take place because of the rashness and negligence on the part of the driver or the conductor of the bus. Feeling aggrieved by such rejection of the claim petition, the appellants have preferred this appeal.

(2.) I have heard the arguments of both the sides.

(3.) It is the duty of the conductor of the bus to see that the passengers who want to get down have got down safely, and, those who want to board it have boarded it safely. The duty of the conductor is to stand at the gate of the bus and see that the passengers are travelling safely. If the rule of precaution and the safety of the passengers are not adhered to by the conductor, he is guilty of the dereliction of his duty exhibiting rashness and negligence on his part.