GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this appeal a short but an interesting question regarding jurisdiction of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal constituted under sec. 110(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 to adjudicate the claim for compensation filed against persons other than the driver owner and insurer of the offending Motor Vehicle involved in the accident falls for determination.

(2.) A few facts leading to this appeal can profitably be looked at at the outset. In a vehicular accident that took place on 4 1974 a bus belonging to the appellant S. T. Corporation driven by its driver- respondent No. 2 met with an accident at the railway level crossing at village Kakosi between Sidhpur and Methan in Mehsana district. When the S. T. bus was approaching the railway level crossing gates on either side were found open and hence the bus proceeded ahead. At that time a railway engine was being driven by its driver one Kadar Ismail. It was proceeding from Patan side towards village Kakosi Water tanker and a break-van were attached to that engine. There was a collision between the said engine and the aforesaid S. T. bus on the level crossing itself. Result was that the bus was dragged by the speeding engine upto some distance and thereafter the engine and the bus came to a halt. During the said collision deceased Harijan Devabhai Kuberbhai who was sitting in the rear portion of the bus was thrown out of the bus and got seriously injured. He died on account of the injuries sustained by him in the said accident. He left behind him his widow Rajiben one adult son Rayabhai two minor sons Hirabhai and Kanabhai and one minor daughter Kantaben. All these legal heirs and representatives of the deceased moved a claim petition under sec. 110 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 before the M.A.C. Tribunal at Mehsana within whose jurisdiction the accident had taken place. They joined in the claim petition the Union of India as opponent No. 1 representing the Western Railway the engine belonging to which was involved in the accident alongwith the S. T. Bus. Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation which was the owner of the offending bus in which the deceased was travelling was also joined as opponent No. 2 while driver of the S. T. bus was joined as opponent No. 3. The claim petition was registered as claim petition No. 65 of 1974. Compensation was claimed against the concerned opponents on the basis that both the engine driver as well as S. T. driver were negligent and because of their composite negligence the accident in question was caused. Thus on the principle of joint liability of both of them as joint tortfeasors the claimants requested the Tribunal to adjudicate the claim of the claimants against the concerned opponents and to award proper compensation They claimed in all Rs. 37 971 from the concerned opponents

(3.) The defence of the Union of India was to the effect that the Claims Tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain any claim against the Union of India representing the Western Railway as the Tribunal was constituted only for adjudicating claims for compensation for accidents caused by use of motor vehicles and that any claim against the Union of India should be made subject matter of a civil suit if any. In the alternative it was contended that there was no negligence on the part of any of the servants of the railway and that the negligence of only S. T. driver had resulted in the accident. While so far as S. T. driver and the S. T. Corporation were concerned they contended that the accident was caused not on account of negligence on the part of the driver of the bus but it was solely caused on account of the negligence of the servants of the Western Railway as they had failed to close the gate at the relevant time and had kept the gate open which tempted the bus driver to enter .he railway crossing. They also challenged the claim on merits.