A bus driver owes a duty to passengers to ensure their safety, and is negligent if he fails to take reasonable steps to avoid foreseeable risks of injury.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal under section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act against the award of damages by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

( 2 ) ON June, 17, 1960 Mrs. Want, respondent, was travelling in D. T. U. bus No. DLP 257 on route No. 10 at about 3. 30 P. M. On new Link Road, a cart full of long logwoods which are usully used as rafters under the roofs and also for the construction of sheds, was going ahead, of the bus. Those logs were protruding out of the cart. The driver of the bus, while trying to overtake this cart, acted rashly and negligently at a high speed. He swerved the bus so suddenly at a high speed that the logs of wood hit the arm of the respondent, who was sitting next to the window on the left side of the bus and injured her. She got compound fracture of her left arm bones in addition to other bruises all over. She was taken to Sir Ganga Ram Hospital where she was admitted for treatment and had to incur heavy expenses. She filed an applicat on under section 110 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 25000. 00. This application was resisted by the appellants. It was averred that she had placed her elbow outside the window of the bus in spite of the warning of the conductor and it was for that reason that the accident took place resulting in the fracture of her hand. The liability to pay any compensation was also disputed.

( 3 ) THE following issues, with which I am now concerned, were framed by the Tribunal : "3. Whether the accident was due to the contributory negligence of the applicant ? 4. Whether the injuries were sustained by the applicant due to rash and negligent driving of the bus by respondent No. 3 ? 5. To what amount of compensation, if any, applicant is entitled ? The learned Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident had taken place because of the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver because of the contributory negligence of the applicant. A sum of Rs. 2150. 00 was awarded as compensation.

( 4 ) THE learned counsel for the appellant, contends that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the bus. He also submits that but for the respondent keeping her elbow on the window of the bus in spite of the directions to the contrary, there would have been no accident and so she was not entitled to any damages.

( 5 ) IT is not disputed that the respondent was travelling in the bus of the appellant on the date and time in question. It is also not disputed that at the time of the accident the bus was overtaking a cart full of logs of wood which were protruding out of the cart and it was because of one of the logs hitting the extended elbow that the accident took place.

( 6 ) THE only question to be decided is whether the respondent was negligent in putting her elbow on the window of the bus and that the driver owed no duty to her safety in that situation.

( 7 ) THE appellants produced Mr. Dharam Pal, Traffic Inspector, to prove that there were painted instructions on the bus prohibiting the passengers from putting their arms outside the bus. Prem Singh, conductor of the bus in question, also corroborated the Traffic Inspector. He also stated that when the bus reached Teliwara he found that the arms of several passengers were outside the windows and so he asked them to keep their arms inside. They obeyed the instructions and kept their arms inside. Again, when the bus reached Pabarganj he again asked the passengers to keep their arms inside and again they obeyed. One of the passengers, who was keeping her arm outside, was the respondent and had not obeyed the instructions.

( 8 ) KRISHAN Lal, driver of the bus, stated that he had noticed the cart with the logs but he had overtaken it after finding that he could easily overtake it.

( 9 ) THE respondent in her statement denied that the conductor had warned the passengers at any stage of their journey that they should keep their hands inside the bus. She also stated that she was illiterate and