Back
2007 Supreme(P&H) 2068
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
Sham Sunder, J.
Sudama Devi
Versus
Kewal Ram
First Appeal First Order No. 673 of 1990,723 of 1990,
Decided On : NOVEMBER 28, 2007
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of negligence on the part of the bus driver, leading to the accident and death of Chander Wali, and the modification of the compensation amount based on the deceased's income and family dependency.
Headnote:
Motor Accidents - Compensation - Motor Vehicles Act - Section 304-A of Indian Penal Code - [Chander Wali deceased, his wife Sudama Devi and Munshi Ram her brother had come to see off his (Chander Walis) sister and her husband and they were waiting for a bus near New Corner Hotel, Patiala. A bus bearing No. PUV 2423 reached there and the conductor of the bus was repeating time and again that the same was going to Nabha and at this Chander Wali, deceased stepped into the bus from its front side door, but Sudama Devi, however, could not board the same. Since Sudama Devi could not board the bus, he requested the conductor to stop the same, as a result whereof, it was stopped for a while, in between the railway gate No. 18 and the crossing near New Corner Hotel, Patiala. At that time, Chander Wali tried to get down from the bus, but Kewal Ram, driver of the same, started it at once, without ensuring that he had actually got down therefrom. On account of the rash and negligent act of the driver of the bus, Chander Wali fell down from the bus and sustained injuries. When he was being taken to the hospital, he died on the way.] - [Motor Vehicles Act, Section 304-A of Indian Penal Code] - The court found that the driver of the bus was negligent in driving the bus, leading to the accident and death of Chander Wali. The court also modified the compensation amount based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and reduced the interest rate awarded by the Tribunal.
Fact of the Case:
Chander Wali deceased, his wife Sudama Devi and Munshi Ram her brother had come to see off his (Chander Walis) sister and her husband and they were waiting for a bus near New Corner Hotel, Patiala. A bus bearing No. PUV 2423 reached there and the conductor of the bus was repeating time and again that the same was going to Nabha and at this Chander Wali, deceased stepped into the bus from its front side door, but Sudama Devi, however, could not board the same. Since Sudama Devi could not board the bus, he requested the conductor to stop the same, as a result whereof, it was stopped for a while, in between the railway gate No. 18 and the crossing near New Corner Hotel, Patiala. At that time, Chander Wali tried to get down from the bus, but Kewal Ram, driver of the same, started it at once, without ensuring that he had actually got down therefrom. On account of the rash and negligent act of the driver of the bus, Chander Wali fell down from the bus and sustained injuries. When he was being taken to the hospital, he died on the way.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the driver of the bus was negligent in driving the bus, leading to the accident and death of Chander Wali. The court also modified the compensation amount based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and reduced the interest rate awarded by the Tribunal.
Issues: The issues were whether Chander Wali died due to rash and negligent driving of the bus, the amount of compensation the claimants are entitled to, and the relief.
Ratio Decidendi: The driver of the bus was found to be negligent in driving the bus, leading to the accident and death of Chander Wali. The court also modified the compensation amount based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and reduced the interest rate awarded by the Tribunal.
Final Decision: F.A.F.O. No. 673 of 1990 is partly accepted with no order as to costs and the amount of compensation is enhanced to Rs. 1,31,600 from Rs. 76,800 awarded by the Tribunal. All the appellants-claimants shall be entitled to receive compensation in equal shares. They shall also be entitled to interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum instead of 12 per cent per annum from the date of filing the application till realization of the amount of compensation. The shares of the appellants-claimants, Durga Devi, Laxmi Devi, Rajiv Kumar and Ranjit Kumar, who were minors at the time of filing the claim petition, shall be deposited in F.D.Rs. in their names, if they have not already attained majority and they shall be entitled to receive the same, on attaining majority. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are held jointly and severally liable to pay the amount of enhanced compensation. Any amount received by the appellants- claimants, under no fault liability clause, shall stand adjusted against the amount of compensation. F.A.F.O. No. 723 of 1990, titled as Pepsu Road Trans. Corpn. v. Sudama Devi, is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Sham Sunder, J.
1. This judgment shall dispose of the afore-stated two appeals, the first filed by the claimants-appellants for the enhancement of compensation and the second filed by the Pepsu Road Transport Corporation, the owner of the bus, for dismissal of the claim petition, arising out of one and the same award dated 8.3.1990, rendered by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Patiala, relating to the same accident.
2. On 7.12.88, Chander Wali deceased, his wife Sudama Devi and Munshi Ram her brother had come to see off his (Chander Walis) sister and her husband and they were waiting for a bus near New Corner Hotel, Patiala. A bus bearing No. PUV 2423 reached there and the conductor of the bus was repeating time and again that the same was going to Nabha and at this Chander Wali, deceased stepped into the bus from its front side door, but Sudama Devi, however, could not board the same. Since Sudama Devi could not board the bus, he requested the conductor to stop the same, as a result whereof, it was stopped for a while, in between the railway gate No. 18 and the crossing near New Corner Hotel, Patiala. At that time, Chander Wali tried to get down from the bus, but Kewal Ram, driver of the same, started it at once, without ensuring that he had actually got down therefrom. On account of the rash and negligent act of the driver of the bus, Chander Wali fell down from the bus and sustained injuries. When he was being taken to the hospital, he died on the way.
3. At the time of the accident and death of Chander Wali, he was aged about 25 years. He was a labourer and was also running a tea stall. His monthly income was Rs. 2,100, Sudama Devi, widow; Durga Devi and Laxmi Devi, minor daughters; Rajiv Kumar and Ranjit Kumar, minor sons of Chander Wali were completely dependent upon him for their livelihood. Accordingly, a petition under the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming compensation in the sum of Rs. 5,00,000 was filed.
4. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3, put in their appearance and filed written statement, wherein, they took up various objections and contested the petition. It was pleaded that the petition was not maintainable as all the legal heirs of Chander Wali had not been impleaded as a party. The accident was admitted, but it was denied that the driver of the bus was rash or negligent in driving the same. On the other hand, it was stated that Chander Wali, deceased tried to board the bus which was at a slow speed due to rush on the road, but he could not board the same as a result whereof he fell down and received injuries. It was further stated that Chander Wali was himself negligent, as a result whereof, the accident took place. The remaining averments were denied, being wrong. The respondent Nos. 4 and 5 were duly served but were not present. They were proceeded against ex parte by the Tribunal.
5. In the replication filed by the appellants, they reasserted all the averments, contained in the petition and repudiated those contained in the written statement.
6. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were struck by the Tribunal:
"(1) Whether Chander Wali died due to rash and negligent driving of bus No. PUV 2423 by its driver Kewal Ram? OPP
(2) To what amount of compensation the claimants are entitled and from whom? OPP
(3) Relief?"
7. The parties led evidence. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on going through the evidence on record, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the driver of the bus was rash and negligent in driving the same, as a result whereof, the accident took place leading to the death of Chander Wali, deceased. The Tribunal further held that the monthly income of the deceased was Rs. 700 and the dependency of the claimants-appellants was to the tune of Rs. 400 per month. Accordingly, applying multiplier of 16, the Tribunal awarded compensation in the sum of Rs. 76,800 with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum.
8. Feeling aggrieved against the award dated 8.3.199
