Skip to content


R.S.R.T.C. and ors. Vs. Mahesh Kumar - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectInsurance;Motor Vehicles
CourtRajasthan High Court
Decided On
Judge
Reported in1(1985)ACC464
AppellantR.S.R.T.C. and ors.
RespondentMahesh Kumar
Excerpt:
- .....college, was going on a motor cycle when bus no. r.s.m. 5862 came with excessive speed having iron angle on the roof. pukh raj, who was driving the motor-cycle took the motor cycle on left side and stopped it apprehending trouble. it was night the bus driver did not use even dipper and iron angle were not visible. the iron angles struck the eye of the claimant due to which he lost left eye and also received some injuries.2. mr. l.m. jain, contested the finding of the tribunal and argued that iron angle was not on the bus.3. this argument of mr. jain, is wholly tenable as pw 1, mahesh kumar, pw 2, pukh raj and pw 3 hastan singh and others have proved it.4. the fir and site inspection note ex. p. 14, provides clinching evidence that iron angle was hanging from the bus and the bus was.....
Judgment:

G.M. Lodha, J.

1. This is a hopeless appeal filed by the Rajasthan State Transport Corporation, against the judgment of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Mahesh Kumar a young boy of 19 years student of Commerce College, was going on a motor cycle when bus No. R.S.M. 5862 came with excessive speed having iron angle on the roof. Pukh Raj, who was driving the motor-cycle took the motor cycle on left side and stopped it apprehending trouble. It was night the bus driver did not use even dipper and iron angle were not visible. The iron angles struck the eye of the claimant due to which he lost left eye and also received some injuries.

2. Mr. L.M. Jain, contested the finding of the tribunal and argued that iron angle was not on the bus.

3. This argument of Mr. Jain, is wholly tenable as PW 1, Mahesh Kumar, PW 2, Pukh Raj and PW 3 Hastan Singh and others have proved it.

4. The FIR and site inspection note Ex. P. 14, provides clinching evidence that iron angle was hanging from the bus and the bus was standing at the place of accident. The iron angle was blood smered.

5. Curiously enough the Corporation in the written statement denied even existence of iron angle. Trilokchand, AW 6, has proved the site inspection note. He is S.H.O. the Corporation did not dare to ask him in cross examination that he has wrongly mentioned in the site inspection note Ex. P. 14, that there was angle iron on the bus, which was blood smered and hanging from the bus.

6. The keeping of the angle iron on the roof of the bus in a position where it was hanging on the road and struck the motor-cycle is enough to prove the negligence, apart from the other facts proved in this case. The young boy lost his eye on account of this accident.

7. The Corporation has been rightly held liable for the compensation by the Tribunal.

8. In such cases taking false plea and even afterawards filing of the appeal by the Corporation cannot be appreciated and is depreciated. The appeal is dismissed with costs of Rs. 700/-. The Corporation should pay the amount of compensation which has not been deposited so far within one month from today failing which they would pay the interest at the rate of 12% from the date of the claim petition till the date of realisation.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //