Delhi High Court
Rajasthan State Road Transport ... vs Arvind Kumar Agarwal And Ors. on 12 October, 2004
Equivalent citations: I (2005) ACC 636, 118 (2005) DLT 4
Author: R Sodhi
Bench: R Sodhi
JUDGMENT
R.S. Sodhi, J.
1. CM APPL.No.8212/2004 (for restoration)
Heard counsel for the appellant. Cause shown is sufficient. MAC.APP.184/2004 and CM APPL.Nos. 5962-5964/2004 are restored to their original number and number. Application is allowed and disposed of.
2. CM APPL.No.5964/2004 (for exemption)
Allowed subject to just exceptions. Application stands disposed of.
3. CM APPL. No.5963/2004 (for condensation of delay)
Delay is condoned. Application is allowed and disposed of.
4. MAC.APP. 184/2004 and CM APPL.No. 5962/2004 :
This appeal is directed against the Award dated 14th August, 2003 of the Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short "the Tribunal") in Suit No. 248/2003, whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.2,74,000/- together with interest @12% per annum from the date of the petition till 31.3.2001 and thereafter interest @9% per annum till the date of actual payment.
5. The brief facts of the case, as has been noted by the Tribunal, are as under :
"On 25.1.1993 at about 10 a.m. Smt. Saroj Bala (hereinafter referred to as the deceased), mother of the petitioners and respondent no.3 boarded Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation bus bearing No. RJ-14-P1835 (hereinafter referred to as the Offending Bus) from Jaipur for Delhi. The deceased was accompanied by petitioner no.2. At about 4.15 P.M. when the offending bus reached near the entrance gate of I.S.B.T., driver of the bus, respondent no.2 parked the bus by the road side and directed the passengers to get down. Deceased was the last person to de-board the bus. While she was de-boarding, respondent No.2 abruptly moved the bus with a jerk in a rash and negligent manner and as a result the deceased fell down and her head was crushed under the rear wheel of the bus. She succumbed to the injuries on the spot itself. Respondent No.1 is the owner of the offending bus. Respondent No.1 and 2 have filed a joint written statement and denied the contents of the petition. Respondent No.1 and 2 in written statement averred that the offending bus was not involved in the accident in question and that the deceased sustained injuries on account of her own negligence and on being hit by some other vehicle. On completion of pleadings, My Ld.Predecessor framed the following issues :-
1. Whether Smt.Saroj Bala died in the accident as alleged out of rash and negligent driving of the vehicle, as pleaded?
2.Whether the claimants and respondent no.3 are the legal heirs of the deceased?
3.To what amount of compensation the claimants are entitled and from whom?
4.Relief."
6. It is contended by counsel for the appellant that the deceased being a house wife, her income should not have been taken as Rs.3000/- per month.
7. Heard counsel for the appellant. The criteria adopted by the Tribunal is in consonance with the judgment of the Supreme Court in Lata Wadhwa & Ors Vs. State of Bihar & Ors. and therefore, the same cannot be faulted with. In this view of the matter, I find no infirmity in the award under challenge. MAC.APP.184/2004 and CM APPL. 5962/2004 are accordingly dismissed.
