K.C. Agrawal, J. - (1.) THESE twelve connected appeals arise out of the judgment of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Muzaffarnagar, dated 19 -2 -1977, deciding six claim petitions Nos. 153, 154, 155, 156, 157 and 158 of 1970. Out of these six claim petitions, six appeals Nos. 335, 338, 337, 339, 340 and 336 have been preferred by the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, whereas the remaining six appeals, viz. Nos. 398, 403, 402, 401, 399 and 400 have been filed by the claimants.
(2.) THE facts, briefly stated, are these. On 17th June, 1970, Krishna Kumar Chopra along with his family members was going from Ajmeri Gate Delhi to Mussoorie by a taxi, bearing No. USK 5180, when it met with an accident at about 3.30 P.M. on Delhi -Roorkee Road, near village Chhapar within the jurisdiction of police station Purkazi district Muzaffarnagar, with Roadways Bus No. USL 8757, belonging to the B.P. State Road Transport Corporation. The allegations were that the taxi was on its left side at a normal speed. When it had reached near village Chhapar, the Bus came from the opposite direction at a very high speed. The Bus was out of control of the driver. Seeing the bus, the taxi driver moved his vehicle to the further left and went to the Kachcha portion of the Patri, but the bus driver since had lost control over the bus on account of the speed went to the extreme right side and crashed into the taxi, as a result where of the taxi was completely smashed and all the occupants of the taxi were entangled in the wreckage. They would be extricated by the persons who came on the spot. As a result of the accident, Anil Chopra received very serious injuries. His face was mutilated and the flying pieces of windscreen glass pierced through his eyes, mouth and ears. He received other sever injuries also. He remained alive uptil 25th June, 1970, but, ultimately, her succumbed to his injuries. The other occupants of the taxi, K.M. Chopra, his wife Mrs. Usha chopra, Master Deepak Chopra, aged about 13 years, Master Nikku Chopra, aged about 2 years, and Karan Chopra, aged about 10 years received injuries. The injuries received by them are mentioned below; Krishna Kumar Chopra : - (i) Comminuted fracture of the right femur (ii) Compound fracture of the left tibia and fibula (iii) Comminuted fracture of the right arm and of humerus (iv) Injury to the right brachial plexus Smt. Usha Chopra : - (i) fracture and dislocation of right ling joint (ii) fracture of pubis (iii) fracture of left calcaneus (iv) Open injury to forehead. Deepak Chopra : (i) Fracture of right humerus (ii) Open injury to the right upper lip (iii) The afflicted arm became septic and an operation had to be performed. Karan Chopra : Fracture of the skull (ii) His ear was extensively cut on account of the injury and bled profusely. It become septic and a major operation had to be performed due to which he has become disfigured, (iii) A long lacerated wound on the right side of the face (iv) He remained completely unconscious for about 2 -1/2 months and suffered untold misery. Nikku Chopra : (i) Serious head injury for comminuted fracture of skull (ii) Brain contusion giving weakness of left hand. Most of the injuries were of temporary nature and caused temporary disability, but he had residual effect of brain injury. The six claim petitions were contested by the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation on the ground that the accident resulted on account of rashness and negligence of the taxi driver and not that of the bus driver. The case of the Transport Corporation was that the taxi driver was driving the vehicle in a zigzag manner. He had no control on the taxi. As he had no control on the taxi, he rammed the taxi into the bus, which resulted in the unfortunate accident. The Corporation denied that the accident resulted due to the negligence of the driver driving the bus.
(3.) ON the pleadings of the parties, the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal framed the following three issues: 1. Whether the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the Roadways bus? 2. Whether the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the taxi driver? 3. To what amount of compensation, if any, is the Petitioner entitled and from which of the opposite parties?;