C.S.P. Singh, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal by the Plaintiffs arising out of a suit for compensation of Rs. 35,000/ - filed against the Defendant on 14.2.1964. Panna Lal deceased was driving a Farguson tractor on Shamli -Shahdara road in the district of Muzaffarnagar. Mr. Krishna was accompanying him at that time. The Plaintiff's case is that the tractor was being driven by Panna Lal deceased at a normal speed of 8 miles per hour and when it reached near Village Lilon, a Roadways Bus No. USL -9275 belonging to the defendant No. 1 which was being driven by Dhara Singh defendant No. 2, came from the opposite direction at a high speed, and dashed against the tractor, as a result of which Panna Lal deceased sustained grievous injuries and the tractor, which was being driven by him, was irreparably damaged. The front part of the tractor rammed into the bus and was broken. The accident was the direct result of the rash and negligent driving of bus by Dhara Singh, the Defendant No. 2. The accident could have easily been avoided had the driver of the bus exercised due care and skill, while driving the vehicle. Mr. Krishna was also injured in the collision. Defendant No. 2 did not care to provide medical aid to the injured, with the result that all chances of survival of Panna Lal were set at naught. Panna Lal was subsequently removed to the Civil Hospital, Shamli, where he died as a result of the injuries. The suit was filed by Bishamber Sahai, grand father of the deceased, Mr. Duraika Das and Mrs. Bhagwati Devi, the parents, and Mrs. Urmila Devi, his widow. The Plaintiffs further alleged that due to the death of Panna Lal the yield of their agriculture farm, which he had been looking after, has been reduced by not less than Rs. 12,000/ - per year. Mrs. Urmila, the wife of the deceased, suffered both mentally and physically and she was left with none to provide her subsistence. The deceased was a very healthy young man of about 33 years of age at the time of his death and had a long expectancy of life. The death of the deceased caused a loss of not less than Rs. 40,000/ - but claim was being made for Rs. 35,000/ - only. The State of Uttar Pradesh was vicariously liable in as much as Dhara Singh Defendant No. 2 was in its employment at the time of accident.
(2.) IT is not necessary for the purpose of this appeal to go into details of the various defences taken up by the Defendants, inasmuch as the findings recorded on those defences against the Respondents have not been seriously challenged in the appeal. The main defence of the Defendants was that the accident had occurred due to the negligent act of the deceased Panna Lal himself and that at the time when the accident took place he was in an intoxicated condition. It was asserted that Dhara Singh, defendant No. 2, made every attempt to avoid the accident but he could not do so as Panna Lal diverted the tractor towards east when he was only 4 or 5 yards away from the bus and the collision occurred inspite of best efforts on the part of Defendant No. 2, Dhara Singh, to stop the vehicle. The trial court found that the theory of intoxication setup by the Defendants had not been made out and further that intoxication was not the immediate cause of the accident. In arriving at this conclusion it referred to a number of circumstances and the evidence of Dr. V.D. Agarwal (P.W.2), who carried out the autopsy on the dead body of Panna Lal. The Dr. V.D. Agarwal has stated that no trace of alcohol were found in the internal parts of the body at the time of postmortem examination, This being so we are of the view that the trial court rightly held that the plea of the Defendants that the accident was directly caused on account of Panna Lal being intoxicated is not proved. The trial court however, came to the conclusion that the accident had taken place not due to the rash and negligent driving of Dhara Singh, Defendants No. 2, but due to the negligent and rash driving on the part of Panna Lal deceased who had no licence or experience for driving the tractor. It also held that the Plaintiffs other than Mrs. Urmila Devi, Plaintiff No. 4, the wife of deceased, did not have any cause of action for filing the suit. As regard Mrs. Urmila, Plaintiff No. 4, it held that in case Panna Lal himself had not been responsible for the accident, she would have been entitled to an amount of Rs. 15,000/ - as compensation for the loss of life of her husband. In view of the finding that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of Panna Lal deceased the suit was dismissed. All the four Plaintiff have filed this appeal.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the Appellants stated that it is not necessary for us to go into the question as to whether the other Plaintiffs except Mrs. Urmila Devi were entitled to sue or receive the compensation for the death of Panna Lal. This being so, we will consider the appeal qua the right of Mrs. Urmila Devi for being compensated for the death of her deceased husband Panna Lal. Counsel for the Appellants has urged that the evidence adduced by the Plaintiffs in support of their case to establish that the accident had occurred on account of the rash and negligent act of Defendant No. 2, Dhara Singh, was erroneously disbelieved by the trial court. In the alternative it has been contended that the evidence adduced on behalf of the Defendants, even if believed, clearly established that the accident was partly due to the negligence of Dhara Singh, Defendant No. 2, and this being so the only question that survives is regards the quantum of compensation claimable by the Appellants.;