PANWAR, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 14. 12. 924 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chittorgarh (hereafter referred to as `the Tribunal') whereby the Tribunal dismissed the claim petition filed by the appellant.
(2.) BRIEF facts, which are necessary for decision of this appeal are that on 27. 10. 1987 the appellant was travelling in a bus owned by Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter for short `the Corporation') from Chittorgarh to Fatehnagar. It was averred that while the said bus was plying from Chittorgarh to Fatehnagur in the area of Kakarava at about 6. 30 to 7 p. m. , a truck came from opposite direction. It was averred that the driver of the Corporation bus did not leave sufficient space while crossing the truck coming from opposite direction and crossed the bus so close to the said truck that the body of the bus and the truck grazed with each other and the appellant, who was near to window of the bus, sustained injury on his right hand from the arm. It was also averred that at the relevant time, he was an employee of M/s. Rajfed Oil Mill, Fatehnagar and his monthly income from the said employment was Rs. 1500/ -. The appellant claimed in all a sum of Rs. 1,69,500/- as compensation. The respondent Corporation filed written statement wherein the said accident was admitted. However, negligence of the bus driver was denied. The Tribunal framed issues and tried the case. While deciding issues no. 1 and 3, the Tribunal reached to the conclusion that the accident has been established and it has also been established that the said accident resulted in amputation of hand of the appellant but held that the appellant failed to establish negligence of the driver of the Corporation's bus and further arrived at the conclusion that it appears that the said accident was due to the negligence of the truck driver. While deciding issue No. 2 regarding quantum of compensation, the Tribunal held that in view of the finding on issues No. 1 and 3, the claimant is not entitled for any compensation. Issue No. 4 which relates to period of limitation, was decided in favour of the appellant. Aggrieved by the judgment and award impugned, the appellant preferred this appeal. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment impugned and the record. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal fell in error in deciding issues no. 1 and 3 against the appellant despite there being sufficient legal evidence on record. He further contended that the Tribunal fell in error in not computing the quantum of compensation.
(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondents supported the judgment impugned. P. W. 1 Mangal Singh, the appellant stated on oath before the Tribunal that on 27. 10. 87, he was travelling in a bus owned by the Corporation from Chittorgarh to fatehnagar. When the bus was plying between Bhopal Sagar and Kakarava, it was driven at a great speed. At that relevant time, a truck came from opposite direction and the body of the said bus grazed with the truck while crossing each other. The said accident was due to the fault of the driver of the Corporation's bus. This accident resulted in amputation of his right hand. He remained under treatment for a period of three months. He has produced treatment record Ex. 2, medical report Ex. 3, Discharge Ticket from hospital Ex. 4. He has also placed on record the certificate of his permanent disablement issued by the Medical Board of the General Hospital, Udaipur showing permanent disablement and loss of earning capacity to the extent of 80%. He further stated that at the relevant time, he was employed with M/s. Rajfed Oil Mills, which is a co-operative society and he was paid Rs. 1500/- p. m. as salary. P. W. 2 Om Prakash is an eye witness of the occurrence. He stated that there was an accident between the bus owned by the Corporation and the truck while crossing each other. He further stated that the bus driver did not leave sufficient space for the truck coming from the opposite direction while crossing each other and due to this, both the vehicles grazed with each other, further stated that due to this accident, the appellant sustained injury on his right hand, which was in a position of hanging and ultimately resulted in amputation. He took the appellant to Fatehnagar Hospital and thereafter on the advice of doctor at Fatehnagar, he took the appellant to hospital at Udaipur where he was treated by Dr. Dad, Dr. Lal and Dr. Laddha. He further stated that the accident was due to the fault of the driver of the Corporation bus although the truck driver too was negligent. ;