SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

1994 Supreme(All) 54

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
J. P. Semwal, J.
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESHTHROUGH THE COLLECTOR - Appellant
Versus
VIDYAWATI SINGH - Respondents
F. A. F. O. 390 Of 1980
Decided On : 01/19/1994

Advocates Appeared:
R.P.SHASTRI, V.N.AGRAWAL

The State is liable to pay compensation for the negligence of its employees while performing their duties.

Headnote:

MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT - COMPENSATION - DEATH OF MOTORCYCLIST - NEGLIGENCE OF TRUCK DRIVER - LIABILITY OF STATE - QUANTUM OF COMPENSATION.

Fact of the Case:

A motorcyclist, Heera Prasad Singh, died in an accident involving his motorcycle and a truck owned by the State of U.P. The deceased's widow and son filed a claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, alleging negligence on the part of the truck driver and seeking compensation.

Finding of the Court:

The Tribunal found that the accident was caused by the negligent and careless driving of the truck driver and awarded compensation to the claimants. The State of U.P. appealed the decision, arguing that the accident was caused by the negligence of the motorcyclist.

Issues: 1. Whether the accident was caused by the negligence of the truck driver or the motorcyclist. 2. Whether the State of U.P. is liable to pay compensation to the claimants.

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the evidence supported the Tribunal's finding that the accident was caused by the negligence of the truck driver. The court noted that the truck driver failed to blow his horn and that he was driving at a high speed, which led to the accident. 2. The court held that the State of U.P. was liable to pay compensation to the claimants as the truck driver was an employee of the State.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the Tribunal's award of compensation. The court also directed the State of U.P. to pay interest on the compensation amount at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the judgment.

J. P. SEMWAL, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 31. 3. 1980, passed by Motor accidents Claims Tribunal (V Addl. District and Sessions Judge), Deoria, awarding a sum of Rs. 49,212/- along with interest at 6 per cent with costs.

( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to the present appeal may be narrated within narrow compass. An accident took place on 8. 9. 1977, in which Heera Prasad Singh, who was Junior Engineer in public Works Department while driving his motor cycle, collided with truck No. UPQ 1237 of the Agriculture Department of State of U. P. , as a result of which Heera Prasad Singh received serious injuries and was admitted in Civil Hospital, Deoria and was further shifted to Medical college, Gorakhpur, on 16. 9. 1977, where he succumbed to his injuries at 1. 30 a. m. on 17. 9. 1977. Deceased Heera Prasad Singh was aged about 27 years at the time of his death. His widow, vidyawati Singh and son, Satish Kumar Singh, preferred claim petition before the Motor accidents Claims Tribunal claiming Rs. 3,10,000/- along with interest. Both the respondents contested the claim petition. They admitted the factum of accident of 8. 9. 1977 and the death of heera Prasad Singh on 17. 9. 1977. They, however, resisted the claim on the ground that deceased heera Prasad Singh was not owner of Bullet motor cycle No. UTQ 264 nor he had any valid licence and had also no experience of driving a motor cycle. It was urged that the truck driver was driving the truck slowly and carefully. As the truck overtook bullock-cart, Heera Prasad singh suddenly came before the truck from right direction. The truck driver tried his best to avoid the accident and in doing so the truck skidded into a khud. It was urged that the cause of accident was negligence and carelessness of Heera Prasad Singh who was driving his motor cycle on wrong side. It was also alleged that the death of Heera Prasad Singh occurred nine days after the accident and cause of his death could be on any other ground. It was also stated that a sum of Rs. 18,689/- had already been paid to the widow of the deceased.

( 3 ) BOTH the parties adduced evidence before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. The Tribunal found the claim petition of the petitioners maintainable and that the deceased knew driving of motor cycle and that the accident took place on account of negligent and careless driving by Brij bhushan and not on account of carelessness of Heera Prasad Singh.

( 4 ) THE Tribunal held the cause of death of Heera Prasad Singh on account of injuries sustained by him in that accident. The learned Tribunal awarded Rs. 49,212/-including Rs. 4,000/- on medical expenses and Rs. 5,000/- for mental agony, by its judgment and order dated 31. 3. 1980.

( 5 ) AGGRIEVED by this judgment and order, State of U. P. has preferred this appeal on the ground that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of motor cycle by Heera prasad Singh; that Heera Prasad Singh could not maintain balance of the motor cycle when the truck approached and he had no driving licence.

( 6 ) I have heard Mr. R. P. Shastri, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. V. N. Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

( 7 ) THE factum of accident and death of Heera Prasad Singh are not disputed. The only ground of challenge of the judgment and order of the Tribunal is that the evidence proves that the death of heera Prasad Singh took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the motor cycle by heera Prasad Singh as he was carrying two passengers on the back seat of the motor cycle due to which he could not maintain the balance. A perusal of the judgment and order of the Tribunal goes to show that the Tribunal has elaborately dealt with the evidence before it. The evidence of ayodhya Saran Gupta, witness No. 5, produced on behalf of the claimants has been accepted by the Tribunal. He is the eyewitness of the factum of the accident. It has come in his evidence ca








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top