K.P.BHANDARI,J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fridabad, dated 12.8,1987 whereby claim of the appellant was dismissed.
(2.) IN the present case, Haryana Roadways Bus struck against the car of the claimants. Driver of car died on the spot. There were five occupants in the car who received serious injuries. Kama Devi was declared dead on anival at the hospital. On arrival in ihe hospital, Radha Devi was also declared dead. P. L. Dhanuka, claimant, and D. N Bangur, appellant also received serious injuries. They remained confined in the hospital in Delhi and Calcutta. The Tribunal framed the following issues :- "1. Whether the impugned accident was caused by rash and negligent driving of Bus No. HRW 4535 by respondent No. 3? OPP. 2. Whether the accident was earned due to rash and negligent driving of Car No. DIA 5296 by deceased Driver Deep Chand ? OPR. 3. If issue No. 1 is proved whether the petitioners are entitled to any compensation ? If so, how much and from whom ? OPP. 4. Whether the petition is time barred ? OPR 1 to 3. 5. Relief." In this case the learned counsel for the appellants has brought my attention to the evidence of PW 4 Prem Chand. PW-5 Devki Nandan had deposed that on 4.6.1984, he alongwith other persons were coming from Brindaban to Delhi. He has stated that Kanta Devi, Radha Devi, Pursotam Lal, he himself and the driver were the occupants of the car. He has stated that at about 4 15 p.m they were near Palwal and at that time a Haryana Roadways Bus No. 4535 was coming from the opposite direction at a fast speed. The driver of the bus was driving the bus on the wrong side of the road, i.e. right hand side of the road. The bus dashed into the vehicle. All the rive occupants of the car received various injuries. He pointed out that the accident was so serious that Radha Devi and Purshotam Lal were thrown out the vehicle Purshotam Lal received head injuries and one of his eye was thrown out of the sockat. He also received injuries on his waist. The Driver of the car died on the spot. Kanta Devi was declared dead on arrival at the hospital. The remaining three were referred to Safdarjung Hospital, Delhi where Radha Devi was declared dead. The accident was so serious that the Driver and two ladies who were travelling in the car died Devki Nandan also received very serious injuries. PW-10 Purshotam Lal has also supported the statement of Devki Nandan. He has stated that he alongwith others were coming from Bindraban to Delhi. At about 4.15 p.m. when they were little short of Palwal, a Haryana Roadways Bus coming from the opposite direction hit the car. He also received extensive injuries. PW 4 Prem Chand has deposed that he was present at the site of the accident. He his stated that neither the bus driver not the car driver could avoid the accident. According to him, the bus driver could be more blamed for the accident. The respondents have examined Prithvi Singh RW1, Conductor, and Ami Chand RW2, Driver, to support their stand that the bus was not driven rashly and negligently. On consideration of the evidence on record, f find that Devki Nandan PW9 was travelling in the car and was sitting on the front seat He has clearly stated that the Haryana Roadways bus was coming from the opposite direction at a very high speed The bus struck against the car. To the same effect is the statement of Purshotam Lal PW10. Even Prera Chand PW4 has deposed that the bus driver was more to blame for the accident. FIR Ex. PB regarding incident was lodged. A perusal of the FIR shows that the incident was reported to the police by Prem Singh, Sarpanch of Bamani Khera. It has been proved by Dharampal Singh, ASI. According to the FIR, the accident has been caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the bus The statement in the FIR corroborates the other evidence on record that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving by the bus driver. This material evidence was completely overlooked by the Motoi Accident Claims Tribunal while deciding the case. In my opinion, it is clear from the statement of PWs that the bus driver was driving the bus rashly and negligently. The driver of the bus is interested person. He was facing criminal trial Naturally, he had to save his skin and has thrown the blame on the car driver. Prithvi Singh, Conductor, has also tried to support the driver who is his colleague.
(3.) IN view of the evidence discussed above, it is clear that the driver of the bus was driving the bus rashly and negligently and on that account the accident had taken place. The magnitude of the accident which resulted into the death of three persons also shows that the bus was being driven at a high speed and due to the impact of the accident, serious injuries were caused to all the occupants of the car and had resulted into the death of three persons. This shows that the bus driver was driving the bus rashly and negligently. I think the learned tribunal did not correctly appreciate the evidence of the witnesses in coming to the adverse decision. In view of the above discussion, I hold that the bus was driven rashly and negligently. Thus this finding of the tribunal is reversed.;