- (1.) WHILE travelling on the roof of the Pepsu Road Transport Corporation bus PJG 7132, a branch of a tree hit Gurmail Singh, as a result of which he sustained injuries and later died. This happened at about 5. 30 p. m. on June 23, 1983 on the Moga-Baghapurana Road. The Tribunal held this to be a case of contributory negligence on the ground that "the deceased by travelling on the roof of the bus had voluntarily submitted himself to the risk involved in such travelling". The compensation payable to the claimants, they being the parents, widow and children of Gurmail Singh deceased, was assessed at Rs. 57,600/-, but after making the requisite deduction on account of the contributory negligence of the deceased, the amount actually awarded was only Rs. 28,800/ -.
(2.) IT is now the settled position in law, as held by this court in Vijay Singh v. Haryana Roadways 1990 ACJ 18 (Pandh), that travelling on the roof of a bus does not per se constitute contributory negligence on the part of the bus passenger if due to the negligence of the bus driver, any injury is caused to him. It was further observed: There is a duty of care that rests upon the driver of a bus towards all persons travelling on it which covers not only those in it, but extends also to passengers travelling on the roof of it, even though it may not have been permissible in law for them to be there. Breach of any rule or instruction prohibiting travel on the roof of a bus cannot be construed as a licence to the bus driver to drive the bus without due regard to the care and safety of all passengers including those on the roof. Rather, when there are passengers on the roof, extra caution is imperative. These observations are, of course, not to be taken as approving or permitting travel on the roof of a bus. It is clearly incumbent upon the authorities concerned to ensure that travel on the roof of a bus is not only banned, but does not in fact take place as a risk of serious injury is so obviously inherent in such travel.
(3.) THERE can thus be no escape from the conclusion that the Tribunal clearly fell in error in attributing contributory negligence to Gurmail Singh, deceased, merely on the ground that he was travelling on the roof of the bus.;