Rajasthan State Road Transport ... vs Pooja
2023 Latest Caselaw 7997 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:32834]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1325/2019

1. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Through Chairman Rajasthan State Road Corporation, Jaipur.

2. Depot Manager, Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Chittorgarh (Raj.) (Owner Bus)

----Appellants Versus

1. Pooja W/o Late Shri Shankarlal, R/o Takhatpura (Naya Ganv), Tehsil Begu, District - Chittorgarh (Rajasthan)

2. Smt. Ghisi Bai W/o Late Shri Ratanlal, R/o Takhatpura (Naya Ganv), Tehsil Begu, District-Chittorgarh (Rajasthan)

3. Jagdish S/o Late Shri Ratanlal,R/o Takhatpura (Naya Ganv), Tehsil Begu, District - Chittorgarh (Rajasthan)

4. Rameshwar S/o Late Shri Ratanlal, Minor Through His Guardian Mother Smt. Ghisi Bai, R/o Takhatpura (Naya Ganv), Tehsil Begu, District - Chittorgarh (Rajasthan)

5. Radha D/o Late Shri Ratanlal, R/o Takhatpura (Naya Ganv), Tehsil Begu, District - Chittorgarh (Rajasthan)

6. Madandas S/o Shri Prabhdas, R/o Katunda, Tehsil Begu, Districti Chittorgarh (Raj.) (Driver Of Bus)

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. LK Purohit For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

Judgment

DATE OF JUDGMENT 05/10/2023

Heard learned counsel for the appellant on the admission

stage.

2. The present civil miscellaneous appeal has been filed under

Section 173 of the Motor Vehciles Act, 1988 against the judgment

[2023:RJ-JD:32834] (2 of 3) [CMA-1325/2019]

and award dated 20.12.2018 passed by the learned Family Court

(Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Chittorgarh (hereinafter referred

to as the learned Trial Court) in Claim Case no. 161/2017 (CIS No.

99/2015) whereby the learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim

petition and held the respondents no. 1, 2 and 3 liable.

3. The appeal is listed in Defects category today. As per office

report, the appeal is time barred by 44 days and the appellant has

preferred an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for

condonation of delay.

4. For the reasons stated in the application, the application is

allowed. The delay in filing the present appeal is condoned.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned

judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal is erroneous.

It is submitted that the learned Tribunal has grossly erred in

holding that there was negligence on part of the driver of the bus

of the Appellant-RSRTC. It is further submitted that the learned

Tribunal has not considered the evidence in its correct perspective.

It is also submitted that the present is a case of 'res ipsa loquitor'

and the learned Tribunal has failed to consider the aspect of

contributory negligence. Therefore, it is prayed that the present

appeal may be allowed.

6. I have perused the impugned judgment and award as well as

the material available on record.

7. From a perusal of the impugned judgment and award, it is

evident that on 03.09.2014, an accident occurred between the

Apellant-RSRTC bus and motorcycle in which the driver of the

motorcycle-Shankarlal died on the spot. In para 9 of the impugned

judgment, the Tribunal has given a finding that the Appellant-

[2023:RJ-JD:32834] (3 of 3) [CMA-1325/2019]

RSRTC bus was involved in the accident. Further, in para 11 of the

impugned judgment, it has been held that in the police documents

available on record, the involvement of RSRTC bus has been

proved. Thus, considering the aforesaid aspects and looking to the

age of the deceased, the Tribunal passed an award of Rs.

5,73,600/- in favour of claimants. Thus, the learned Tribunal has

passed the award after appreciating the evidence available on

record. The judgment and award is well reasoned and I do not find

any reason to interfere with the same.

8. Consequently, the present appeal is dismissed.

9. No order as to costs.

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J 95-CPG/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)