The driver of a motor vehicle is responsible for driving in a careful and prudent manner, and is liable for any accident caused by his negligence.

( 1 ) THIS appeal under Section 110d of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter called the Act ) is directed against the judgment and award of the Motor Accident claims Tribunal, Delhi dated 28th March, 1980 by which the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 42,300 with costs to the appellants against the respondents who were granted two months time to deposit the amount otherwise the appellants were held entitled to 6 per cent interest from the date of the filing: of the petition till realisation.

( 2 ) THE appellants filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation while the respondents filed another appeal FAO No. 202 of 1980 claiming the dismissal of the claim petition. The Delhi Transport Corporation, respondent No. 2, runs buses in the Union Territory of Delhi. One of its buses DLP 1715 driven by Raja Ram, driver-respondent No. 1 met with an accident on 22nd July, 1972 on Nullah Market, near Community Hall, West Patel Nagar, New Delhi as a result of which Satish Chander Sharma sustained injuries and died. on the spot. Smt. Nirmala Sharma (appellant No. 1) his widow. Baby Sandhya, (appellant No. 2) his daughter, Master Ajay Kumar and Arun Kumar (appellants No. 3 and 4) his sons and Smt. Sushila Devi, his mother on 23rd December, 1972 filled a petition under Section 110a of the Act claiming compensation of Rs. 2 lacs alleging that on 22nd July, 1972 at about 2 P. M. Satish Chander Sharma was going on his motor cycle dlq 2838 at a normal speed on his proper side on the Nullah Market, near Community Hall, West Patel Nagar, New Delhi, that he had covered a large part of the crossing when the offending bus DLP 1715 owned by respondent No. 2 and driven by respondent No. 1 coming at a very high speed, knocked him down and dragged him for a long distance as s result of which he suffered fatal injuries and died on the spot.

( 3 ) THE respondents denied that the accident took place on. account of rash and negligent driving of the bus by the driver, respondent No. 1. They also denied that the bus was running at excessive speed or that it knocked him down along with his Motor cycle or that he was dragged into a long distance. The driver s version as pleaded in the written statement is that the bus DLP 1715 on 22nd July, 1972 at 13. 55 hrs. was proceeding from West Patel Nagar to Shadipur Depot on Route No. 4-B, that when the bus reached the intersection of Block No. 25126 and Marg 9 near the Community Hall and before entering the intersection, he had blown horns and was driving at a slow speed and that all of a sudden the deceased who was driving a motor cycle DLQ 2838 at a rash speed emerged from Block No. 25 side i. e. from the left side of the bus and tried to pass ahead of the bus from going towards Block No. 26, that as a result of this impact, he struck against the front left comer of the bus and received injuries. The driver further pleaded that on sudden appearance of the motor cyclist he applied brakes but because of the short distance between the bus and the motor cycle the accident became inevitable and that the accident was wholly due to the negligence of the deceased.

( 4 ) THE Tribunal held that the accident was the result of composite negligence of both the driver Raja Ram and deceased Satish Chander Sharma and both were equally negligent i. e. 50. 50. The appellants i. e. the widow and three minor children were held to be the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased. The mother of the deceased Smt. Sushila Devi had died during the pendency of the proceedings before the Tribunal and her name was deleted. The Tribunal further held that the dependency of the appellants on the deceased was Rs. 450 per month. The compensation was calculated for 20 years. No deduction on account of family pension, gratunity or provident fund of the deceased was made. A deduction of Rs. 7000 on account of 1/3rd of life insurance money was however made beside 10 per cent deduction on account of lumpsum payment, Thus a