- (1.) HEARD Shri Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant, Shri Parijaat Belaura, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the record.
(2.) THE factual controversy of the present case is that on 16/10/2008 Mohd. Azhar along with other persons were coming back from attending the marriage ceremony in a vehicle bearing registration no.U.P. -44 T/0473/TATA/207 (hereinafter referred to a vehicle) at about 8:30 p.m. when the vehicle reached at Sultanpur - lucknow Highway near Thane Kotwali Musaphir Khana, District - Sulktanpur, a UPSRTC bus bearing registration no. U.P -42 T/5395 which was coming from the opposite direction, dashed the vehicle due to rash and negligence driving on the part of the bus driver as a result of which Mohd. Azhar sustained grievous injuries and died on the spot whereas one Shri Mohd. Abdul salam also sustained injuries and later on died.
(3.) IN view of the said facts, a claim petition has been filed, allowed by judgment and order dated 23.11.2009 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No.3, Sultanpur thereby awarding a compensation to the tune of Rs.3,00,000/ - (Three Lacs Rupees Only) along with interest @ 7% from the date of presentation of the claim petition, under challenged in the present appeal. Shri Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the appellant while challenging the impugned order, has solely argued that accident has not been taken place due to rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver whereas cause of accident was negligence on the part of driver of vehicle in which deceased was travelling. In addition to the said fact, he also submitted that even otherwise, there is a composite negligence on the part of the drivers involved in the accident. So, the action on the part of the Tribunal to award the compensation against the U.P.S.R.T.C. is contrary to the facts on record/evidence. Hence, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 'Negligence' means a breach of duty caused by the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided to those considerations, which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. Since no absolute rule can be laid down by which negligence or its absence can be judged in a given case, 'negligence' would necessarily vary in different cases and, for judging the same, all the attending and surrounding facts and circumstances of a particular case have to be taken into account.;