Uttranchal Transport ... vs Manju Gupta & Ors
2009 Latest Caselaw 4700 Del

30
*       IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                      +    MAC.APP.No.308/2007

%                             Date of decision: 18th November, 2009


      UTTRANCHAL TRANSPORT CORPORATION ..... Appellant
              Through : Mr. Daleep Kumar Dhayani and
                        Mr. Pradeep Mishra, Advs.

                          versus

      MANJU GUPTA & ORS            ..... Respondents
               Through : Mr. A.S. Rani, Adv. for R-1 to 4.

CORAM :-
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA

1.      Whether Reporters of Local papers may
        be allowed to see the Judgment?

2.      To be referred to the Reporter or not?       Not Necessary

3.      Whether the judgment should be
        reported in the Digest?

                           JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. The appellant has challenged the award of the learned

Tribunal whereby compensation of Rs.2,80,224/- has been

awarded to respondent Nos.1 to 4.

2. The accident dated 12th November, 2003 resulted in the

death of Gaurav Gupta. The deceased was survived by his

mother, two sisters and brother who filed the claim petition

before the learned Tribunal.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant has urged only one

ground at the time of hearing of this appeal. The learned counsel

for the appellant submits that the driver of the offending bus was

not negligent and, therefore, the appellant is not liable to pay any

compensation.

4. The deceased was driving the motorcycle while going from

Delhi to Mohan Nagar on 12th November, 2003. His friend Gaurav

Sharma was going on another scooter. When the deceased

reached Mohan Nagar, Near Maujpur check-post, Uttaranchal

Roadways bus bearing No.UP-29 1199 hit the deceased's

motorcycle from behind due to which the deceased fell down and

suffered fatal injuries.

5. PW-3 is the eye-witness who deposed that the Uttaranchal

Roadways bus hit the deceased from behind. PW-6 further

deposed that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent

driving of the offending vehicle which was being driven at a very

high speed. The driver of the bus appeared as RW-1 and

deposed that the motorcycle of the deceased hit the bus from

behind and, therefore, he is not responsible for the accident in

question.

6. The learned Tribunal believed the evidence of PW-3 and

disbelieved the statement of RW-1 on the ground that RW-1 has

not placed on record the mechanical inspection report to

establish that the motorcycle hit the bus from rear side. The

learned Tribunal has observed that as per the FIR, Ex.PW1/7, the

offending bus hit the motorcycle from behind. The finding of the

rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending bus

based upon the preponderance of probabilities is upheld.

7. For all the aforesaid reasons, the appeal is dismissed.

8. The appellant has deposited the entire award amount along

with interest out of which 50% amount has been released to the

claimants in terms of the order dated 11th October, 2007. The

remaining amount has been sent to the learned Tribunal to be

kept in fixed deposit.

9. The learned counsel for claimants/respondents No.1 to 4

submit that he has not been able to trace the payment with the

learned Tribunal.

10. The learned Tribunal is directed to release the balance

award amount to claimants/respondents No.1 to 4 in terms of the

award without any restriction of fixed deposit.

11. The statutory amount of Rs.25,000/- deposited by the

appellant be refunded back to the appellants.

12. Copy of this order be given 'Dasti' to learned counsel for

both the parties under signature of Court Master.

J.R. MIDHA, J NOVEMBER 18, 2009 mk