JUDGMENT

A.P.Misra, J. , Pal Ruma, J.

(1) THIS appeal is by Pallavan Transport Corporation Ltd. challenging the order passed by High Court granting compensation to the claimant to the tune of Rs. 4,50,000 out of the claim of Rs. 6,00,000. The main contention on behalf of the appellant is, the High Court fell into error in coming to the conclusion that driver was negligent in driving the bus which met with an accident injuring the claimant. The other submission is, the grant of compensation is excessive.

(2) THE incident occurred on 21.6.1990 when the respondent travelled in a bus run by the appellant. The case of the appellant is, while the bus was proceeding .slowly during the traffic jam, the respondent attempted to get down from the bus and in the process injured his left leg which had to be amputated. The submission is, the claimant got down from the bus not at any bus-stop but when the bus was proceeding from the Flower Bazar Police Station towards Parrys Corner.

(3) THE respondent filed claim petition alleging when the bus was proceeding near Anderson Street bus-stop, because of traffic jam the bus stopped and then the conductor asked the passengers to get down and it is only then when respondent was getting down, the driver, all of a sudden started the bus at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner which resulted into the fall of the claimant resulting the wheel of the bus running over the leg of the petitioner. The Tribunal after considering evidence of the parties held that the accident occurred because claimant fell down while getting down from the moving bus, which would not constitute any negligence on the part of the driver or the conductor. Accordingly, the claim petition was dismissed but granted compensation of Rs. 12,000 towards no fault liability. The respondent preferred an appeal, the High Court set aside the findings of the trial court and held the compensation cannot be denied to the victim on the facts and circumstances of this case. The High Court records, there is general tendency of the passengers, which is well-known, that in case bus stops for traffic jam or for some other reason between two bus-stops the passengers who have to get down at some nearby place do start getting down, hence the conductor and the driver have to be more careful before restarting the bus. Finally, the High Court held, the accident occurred on account of negligence of the conductor and the driver resulting into injury to the claimant and thus awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 4,50,000. Aggrieved by that, the appellant has filed the present appeal.

(4) THE question for consideration is, as usually in such cases, whether on the facts and circumstances of this case, conductor and driver were negligent or not which resulted into injury of the claimant. The Tribunal relying on the statement of the conductor, according to which when the bus was slowly moving due to the traffic congestion, the passengers in spite of his warning were getting down from the bus, taking advantage of the slow moving of the bus resulting into the accident which cannot be construed any negligence by the conductor or the driver.

(5) THE High Court while considering this question believed the following statement of the claimant Public Witness 1: "The conductor told the passengers who are to go to Parrys Corner to get down here itself. Seven passengers got down before me. My friends who came with me also got down. We got down from the front gate of the bus. When I was getting down suddenly the driver took the bus. I slipped and fell down." According to the statement the conductor told the passengers who are to go to Parrys Corner to get down here itself, claimant further states, in fact seven passengers got down before him and when he was getting down, suddenly the driver started the bus he slipped down. If this be so, which the High Court has believed, the question is if passengers were led by w