Dtc & Ors. vs K.L. Arora
2013 Latest Caselaw 745 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+              MAC.A. 469-70/2006

%              Judgment reserved on: 5th February, 2013
               Judgment delivered on: 14th February, 2013


DTC & ORS.                                           ..... Appellants
                              Through: Mr. J.N. Aggarwal, Adv.


                     versus

K.L. ARORA                                            ..... Respondent
                              Through: NEMO.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J.

1. Vide the instant appeal, appellant has challenged the award dated 12.04.2006, whereby ld. Tribunal has awarded compensation inter-alia with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the petition before the ld. Tribunal till realization:

       1.      For loss of earnings                   Rs.5,000/-
       2.      On account of medical treatment        Rs.44,000/-
       3.      On account of conveyance               Rs.5,000/-
       4.      On account of special diet             Rs.5,000/-
       5.      On account of pain, suffering,
               mental agony                           Rs.10,000/-
       6.      and on account of future loss
               of life amenities                      Rs.30,000/-
               Gross Total                            Rs.99,000/-"

2. Mr. J.N. Aggarwal, ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has argued that the DTC bus bearing no. DEB-6495 was not involved in any of the accident. The driver of the bus on humanitarian ground had taken the injured to hospital. Thereafter the police had falsely implicated the bus and the driver of the bus after three months of the accident.

3. He further submitted that there is no proof or evidence on record advanced by the respondent to prove that the aforesaid bus had met with an accident with any of the vehicle and due to that respondent no. 1 received injuries.

4. The facts of the case are that on 27.09.1999 at about 2.15 PM, respondent had boarded a bus plying on route no. 764 from Nehru Place Bus Terminal to reach his house at Nazafgarh. He got down from the bus at bus stop on Nazafgarh road opposite Sai Baba Temple. When he was waiting on his side of the road to cross the same, a DTC bus bearing no. DEB-6495 came from Nazafgarh side proceeding towards Uttam Nagar, suddenly sheared to its right by hitting respondent along with a two wheeler scooterist who was coming from Uttam Nagar side. Respondent had received grievous injuries, his left arm and hand was badly crushed. His ribs were fractured. He had received several abrasions on his face and chest. He was taken to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital.

5. The appellant in his written statement, filed before the ld. Tribunal, has stated that the accident had not taken place because of

rash and negligent driving and the aforesaid bus was not involved in the accident.

6. It is further stated that respondent no. 1 was struck by a scooterist, who also got his leg fractured because of fall of the scooter. It is further stated that on the request and in order to help the injured, driver of the DTC bus had taken the respondent no. 1 and scooterist to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital and left there. Thereafter, police has falsely implicated him in this case.

7. Ld. Tribunal has framed two issues. However, issue no. 1 is relevant to dispose of the instant appeal which is as under:-

"Whether the petitioner sustained injuries in road accident dated 27.09.1999 as a result of the rash and negligent driving of DTC Bus bearing NO. DBP-6495 by R-1, as alleged? OPP

8. Injured (Respondent herein) appeared as PW1 and produced PW2 Dashrath, Medical Record Clerk, Mata Chanan Devi Hospital and PW3 Naveen Kumar, Medical Record Technician, Batra Hospital whereas appellant examined RW1 Sh. Naresh Kumar and RW-2 Sh. Ramesh Kumar in order to defend his case.

9. Respondent in his statement stated that on 27.09.1999, at about 2/2.15 PM, he had boarded a bus from Nehru Place Bus Terminal plying on route no. 764 to go Sai Baba Temple at Nazafgarh. At about 4 PM, he got down from that bus at Nazafgarh bus stand opposite Sai Baba Temple and he was waiting on the correct side of the road to cross the road. At about 4.10 PM, a DTC Bus bearing no. DEB-6495

driven by respondent no. 2 (appellant no. 2 herein) in a rash and negligent manner came at a very fast speed from Nazafgarh side, its driver Naresh Kumar sheared it towards him and hit due to which he received injuries.

10. To prove his case, he produced photocopy of FIR recorded on his statement, site plan, MLC/MLR, Mechanical Inspection Report of bus which are Ex.PW1/1 to 1/4.

11. In cross-examination, only suggestion has been put to him that he was not hit by a DTC bus mentioned above and the said bus was not involved in this accident.

12. The aforesaid suggestion has been denied by respondent no. 1. He also denied the suggestion that he was hit by one of the scooterists and the appellant no. 2 had removed him to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital.

13. Appellant no. 2 in his statement deposed that on 27.09.1999 he was driving a bus bearing no. DEB-6495 plying on route no. 818. At about 4 PM, when he reached near Sai Baba Mandir, Nazafgarh, there was a crowd. One Scooter bearing no. DL9S-6361 was already lying there and two persons were also present. One person Ramesh, who was travelling in a bus as a passenger told him that Scooterist was his nephew named Praveen Kumar and requested to take him to hospital. He further deposed that K.L. Arora (respondent / claimant) was also present at the spot as he had received minor injuries on his hand. He had taken them to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. He had informed his

control room also that no accident had taken place from his bus. He further deposed that police met him after three months on 20.12.1999. He was falsely arrested and the vehicle was also impounded.

14. In cross-examination, he has admitted that DDU Hospital was not in the route of his bus. It was about 13/14 Kilometres away from Sai Baba Mandir. There were 48 passengers sitting in his bus. He had told all the passengers to leave the bus at Sai Baba Mandir.

15. He further admitted in cross-examination that it was not in his power to ask 48 passengers to leave the bus on the request of one passenger to take his relative, lying on the road side, to hospital which was 13 kilometres away from that place.

16. RW2 Ramesh Kumar deposed that on 27.09.1999, he was travelling in bus bearing no. DEB-6495 plying on route no. 818, reaching near Sai Baba Mandir, he had seen that his nephew Praveen was lying injured on the road side along with K.L. Arora / respondent. He had requested the bus driver to take his nephew as well as K.L. Arora to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. At his request and on the request of other villagers sitting in the bus, driver had taken his nephew and K.L. Arora to Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. He got them admitted in Mata Chanan Devi Hospital. He further deposed that his nephew was driving Scooter no. DL-98-C-6361 and had caused an accident in which K.L. Arora received injuries. Further deposed that accident was not caused by DTC bus as mentioned above.

17. In view of the above witnesses, ld. Tribunal has recorded in the

impugned award that the story set up by the appellant no. 2 and RW-2 appears to be fake, concocted and afterthought because no DTC driver is allowed to take any injured persons lying on the road 13/14 kilometres away from the route of bus after vacating his passengers. Even RW-1 admitted this fact in his cross-examination. PW2 has stated that he had got his nephew admitted in Mata Chanan Devi Hospital, but he did not produce any medical record of his treatment. He did not even produce his nephew Praveen in the witness box to prove the story. Neither the appellant no. 2 nor the appellant no. 1 DTC had made any complaint to higher authority about the false implication of the appellant no. 2 and the DTC bus in this case.

18. In view of the above, ld. Tribunal has opined that in these circumstances, there appears to be no truth in the defense put up by the appellants.

19. It is established from deposition of the witnesses and discussion above, the DTC bus bearing No. DEB-6495 started from Nehru Place Bus Terminal and reached near Sai Baba Mandir at the time and place of accident. This fact has been deposed by the respondent and corroborated by RW1, i.e. Naresh Kumar (driver) and RW2 Ramesh Kumar, the witness produced by the appellants in their defence.

20. It is also admitted fact that FIR was lodged on the statement of respondent / injured. Admittedly, criminal case was filed against the driver of the bus in question for rash and negligent driving and sustaining injuries. Driver of the bus was arrested and bus was also

impounded.

21. Moreover, it is not in dispute that respondent received injuries and got admitted in the above named hospital. Driver of the bus himself, after the accident, had taken the injured to hospital. Respondent / claimant proved of his case before Tribunal, whereas, appellant has failed to defend.

22. In view of above discussion, I find no discrepancy in the award passed by the ld. Tribunal.

23. Finding no merit in the instant appeal, same is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.

24. Pursuant to order dated 26.05.2006 appellant has deposited the entire awarded amount as per the directions. Registrar General of this court is directed to release the compensation amount in favour of the respondent / claimant as per the terms and conditions as enumerated in the impugned award dated 12.04.2006 passed by the ld. Tribunal.

25. Statutory amount shall also be released in favour of the appellant / Insurance Company.

SURESH KAIT, J

FEBRUARY 14, 2013 Jg