( 1. ) THE claimant appellant Indramal has preferred this appeal against the orders dated 29. 8. 1979 passed by Mr. R. C. Shrivastava, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bhopal, in M. A. C. C. No. 35 of 1977, dismissing the claimants/appellants claim for compensation under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, for special and general damages, totalling Rs. 2,11,750/-in respect of injuries sustained in an accident which occurred on 3,1. 1977. The learned Tribunal in the impugned order held that the accident was not caused due to the rash and negligent driving by the bus driver/respondent No. 2. The petition accordingly has been dismissed with costs.

( 2. ) IT is common ground that on 3. 1. 1977 at about 9 a. m. a city bus belonging to respondent No. 1, M. P. S. R. T. Corpn. , was driven by Kallu Khan, respondent No. 2 and the Lambretta scooter was driven by the cousin of the claimant, Rameshchand. At the time of the accident, the claimant was sitting on the pillion seat of the scooter. Due to the accident, injuries were sustained by the claimant, as well as the scooter driver Rameshchand. Both the injured were taken to the hospital.

( 3. )

(i) The claimants case is that he is aged 20 years and was a student taking some training in the I. T. Centre, Govindpura, Bhopal and was simultaneously, for his livelihood, doing some part-time tailoring and earned thereby Rs. 350/-per month. The claimant was on the pillion seat and the scooter was driven by his cousin Rameshchand. They cross-passed an overbridge called Bogda Pul. Near the Govindpura bus stop, a Roadways Sugam bus was stationary and the scooterist cross-passed the Sugam bus and took a turn at the junction where the road bifurcated for proceeding towards Govindpura. The claimant as also the scooterist, with their hands, signalled while taking the turn but the Roadways bus coming from the direction of Piplani was at a high speed and it dashed the scooter dragging it for a distance of about 20 to 25 yards. The scooter was also damaged. The road is about 40 ft. in width at the place of the incident which would not have occurred if the Roadways bus had been driven with due care and caution. The accident occurred because of the rash and negligent driving of the Roadways bus driven by respondent No. 2.

(ii) The claimant Indramal sustained injuries which included a compound fracture on left leg, compound fracture at the kneecap. He also sustained injuries on the head and on left eye. He was unconscious for 21 days and was admitted in Habibganj Hospital. Due to the serious injuries his future has become bleak and it has also caused disablement. His industrial training in tailoring was affected. He thus claimed Rs. 1,11,750/- as loss of income, Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for loss of studies, Rs. 10,000/- as special damages for bodily and physical suffering and for expenses to be incurred in engaging an attendant, Rs. 25,000/- for shortening of life, Rs. 5,000/for medical expenses, Rs. 50,000/-for future treatment by way of plastic surgery and for visiting for that purpose Pune, Chandigarh etc. The total claim for damages was Rs. 2,11,750/ -.

( 4. ) BOTH the respondents filed a joint written statement and denied the alleged manner in which the accident took place. It was averred that the said-bus was coming from B. H. E. L. Route No. 15 towards the bus stand; that there was one Sugam bus which the scooterist tried to overtake and further more the scooterist "suddenly emerged from behind the Sugam bus on the right side and crossed the road from left to right"; that the two buses were proceeding in opposite directions and the scooterist after overtaking the Sugam bus emerged on the road and in order to avoid a danger of being sandwiched between the two buses, turned towards the right side and tried to cross the road from left to right, but meanwhile, the Lambretta dashed with the bus, though in spite of respondent No. 2 having applied the brakes, which would be apparent from th