1/5

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JODHPUR

: J U D G M E N T :

(i)

S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO. 1116/2016

Kamlesh Patidar, Manager, RSRTC, Doongarpur

vs.

Kanti Lal & anr.

(ii)

S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO. 1117/2016

Kamlesh Patidar, Manager, RSRTC, Doongarpur

vs.

Soma & Ors.

DATE OF JUDGMENT : 22/8/2016

P R E S E N T

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI

Mr. L.K.Purohit, for the appellant.

BY THE COURT:

These appeals are directed against the judgment

and award dated 3/2/2016 passed by the Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal, Doongarpur ('the Tribunal'),

whereby, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of

Rs.30,939/- to respondent Kanti Lal for the injuries

suffered by him and a sum of Rs.5,60,712/- to

respondent Soma and another on account of death of

Ashok Kumar, their son.

The applications for compensation were filed by

the claimants inter alia with the averments that Kanti

Lal was driving the Motor Cycle along with deceased

2/5

Ashok Kumar as pillion rider on 28/6/2014 when at Kali

Ghati Bichhiwada the Bus belonging to appellant

Corporation being driven rashly and negligently by its

driver collided with the Motor Cycle, resulting in

injuries to both Ashok Kumar and Kanti Lal, to which

Ashok Kumar succumbed.

A response to the applications was filed by the

Corporation inter alia claiming that the accident did

not occur on account of any negligence of the driver of

the Bus and in fact accident occurred on account of

rash and negligent driving by Kanti Lal, who came on

the wrong side and could not control the Motor Cycle

and collied with the Bus.

The Tribunal framed four issues. On behalf of

claimants, two witnesses were examined and 30

documents were exhibited and on behalf of appellant

Corporation, driver Mohd. Salim was examined. After

hearing the parties, the Tribunal came to the

conclusion that from the documents available on

record, it is apparent that the accident occurred on

account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of

the Bus and, therefore, the Corporation along with

driver were liable for payment of compensation. While

determining the amount of compensation, the Tribunal

3/5

came to the conclusion that the deceased Ashok Kumar

was aged 22 years and applying the multiplier of 18

and taking the income of the deceased at minimum

wages and deducting 50% towards personal expenses,

awarded a sum of Rs.5,30,712/- as compensation and

Rs.10,000/- towards funeral expenses. Further sum of

Rs.20,000/- was awarded towards loss of love and

affection.

So far as injured Kanti Lal is concerned, looking to

the injuries suffered by him, the Tribunal awarded a

sum of Rs.30,939/-. It was directed that interest @ 9%

p.a. be paid w.e.f. the date of applications i.e.

12/9/2014.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the

appellant that the Tribunal has committed an error in

coming to the conclusion that the accident occurred on

account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of

the Bus. It was submitted that from the statement of

NAW.1-Modh. Salim and the case which was put up in

cross examination to the said witness, it is apparent

that the accident occurred as Kanti Lal lost control over

the Motor Cycle and the Motor Cycle skidded and

struck the Bus which was going on its correct side and,

4/5

therefore, the appellant cannot be held liable for

payment of compensation.

I have considered the submissions made by the

learned counsel for the appellant and perused the

material available on record along with the record of

the Tribunal.

A bare look at the site map prepared by police

clearly indicates that at the place where the accident

occurred on the road, the Bus was clearly on the wrong

side and after colliding with the Motor Cycle has

dragged the Motor Cycle over 16 ft., which clearly

indicates that the Bus was in great speed. Merely

because the MTO report indicates