The driver of a motor vehicle coming on to the main road from a by-lane or side road must slow down his vehicle and to enter it only on being aware that he can do so without endangering the safety of persons thereon and further it is the driver of such vehicle, who must give way to traffic on the main road.

1. Madan Lal Sharma, a Radio Operator at the Aeronautical Communication Station. Raja Sansi, Airport, Amritsar was on his way to Amritsar on his scooter with Tarlok Singh on the pillion seat thereof, when he was run over and killed in an accident with a bus proceeding towards Ajanala on the Amritsar-Ajnala Road. This happened at about 4 P.M. on May 14, 1976.

2. It was the case of the claimants that Madam Lal Sharma, deceased, was trying to turn his scooter on the correct side of the Amritsar-Ajnala Road, when the bus PNO-2720 coming from the opposite direction at a very fast speed suddenly swerved towards its right without blowing any horn and struck against his scooter.

3. According to the counter version of this accident on the other hand, the fault lay entirely with Madan Lal Sharma, deceased, who it was said had suddenly come on to the main road from a side road and that too from its wrong side and struck against the bus. The bus driver tried to avert the accident, but failed to do so.

4. It was the finding of the Tribunal that the accident here had been caused by the rash and negligent driving of the bus driver, but there was also contributory negligehce on the part of the deceased too. It being observed in this behalf. It appears that he was also negligent for not slowing down the scooter before entering the main road. In case the deceased would have been slightly cautious. he would have stopped the scooter and looked towards the right and left before entering the main road. It appears that he was also guilty of contributory negligence." A sum of Rs. 53,760.00 was awarded as compensation to the claimants after making due allowance for the contributory negligence of the deceased.

5. The issue of negligence provides the main controversy in appeal. It was vehemently contended by Mr. V. P. Gandhi. counsel for the appellants that it was the deceased, who was wholly to blame for the accident. The argument being that this was an accident caused by a vehicle coming on to the main road from a side road and that too without the deceased slowing down his scooter or ensuring that the road was clear. Breach of Regulations 6 and 7 of the 10th Sch. of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 was pointedly attributed to the deceased in this behalf. It was thus said that on the face of it, the fault for the accident lay with Madan Lal Sharma. deceased.

6. The scooter involved in the accident had indeed come on to the main road from a side road and a reading of the evidence on record would show that before entering the main road the deceased had neither stopped not slowed down the scooter. This was so deposed to by A. W. 4 Tarlok Singh, who was also on the scooter at that time. It is also apparent that deceased did not exercise due care to see if the main road was clear before proceeding to enter it. In the claim application it had no doubt been stated that the deceased coming from the Airport was trying to turn the scooter when the bus swerved towards the right and hit into it, implying thereby that the scooter had already crossed the main road and had gone on to the left side when the bus hit into it, but it deserves note that the scooter is not a vehicle which permits a right angle turn. The width of the road is stated to have been 15 to 20 feet which would mean that in order to turn and get on to the left side of the road, the deceased, would have had to begin turning the scooter from at least the Middle of the road if not earlier. This would appear to be so also with reference to the testimony of AW. 4 Tarlok Singh. In the first instance he had stated that the accident occurred just when the scooter touched the main road. Later, however, in cross-examination his version was that the scooter had covered half the portion of the road when the accident occurred. Here the swerving of the bus towards the right assumes importance. The circumstances clearly point to the bus driver having taken the bus towards his right in an attempt to avoid the