Ahmedabad Municipal Corp. vs Damyantiben and Others

M.D. Shah, J.—First Appeal No. 63 of 2005 has been filed by the original opponent No. 4-Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation while First Appeal No. 101 of 2005 has been filed by the original opponent No. 2-ST Corporation being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 13-4-2004 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Ahmedabad, in MACP No. 144 of 1995. First Appeal No. 64 of 2005 has been filed by the original opponent No. 2-Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated 13-4-2004 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Ahmedabad, in MACP No. 1418 of 1995. Facts in short are that MAC Petition No. 144 of 1995 has been filed by widow and legal heirs of deceased Rameshbhai Ukabhai Vaghela claiming compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/- for death of the deceased which is caused in a vehicular accident which occurred on 1-7-1994 between ST Bus No. GJ-1-Z-2172 and Tanker No. GJ-1-T-7845 near Gujarat Vidyut Board Office while the deceased was on his way from Vadodara to Ahmedabad. MAC Petition No. 1418 of 1995 has been filed by the ST bus driver claiming compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- for severe injuries suffered by him in the said accident. Upon hearing the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considering the oral as well as documentary evidence on record, the impugned common judgment and award was passed by the Tribunal.

I have heard learned advocate, Ms. Vasavdatta Bhatt for ST Corporation, learned Senior Advocate, Mr. R.R. Marshall for Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, learned advocates, Ms. Mita S. Panchal for driver of ST bus, Mr. Kartik Soni for mother of the deceased and Mr. A.V. Prajapati for widow of the deceased. I have also gone through the impugned judgment and award and taken into consideration relevant oral as well as documentary evidence such as FIR and panchnama and other evidence.

A Division Bench of this Court (Coram: Hon''ble The Chief Justice and Hon''ble Mr. Justice H.K. Rathod) passed the following order on 18/07/2005 qua disbursement:

After hearing the learned counsel for both sides, it is directed that from the compensation deposited and invested in this case, Rs. 50,000/- be released in favour of Chanchalben Ukabhai Vaghela (mother of the deceased) on proper verification. The remaining amount and the amount, if any, deposited in this Court u/s 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which may be transmitted to the Tribunal concerned, be invested with a nationalised Bank for a period of three years, in the first instance, extendable in case the Appeal is not heard within this period. The interest accrued on the deposit be paid to Chanchalben Ukabhai Vaghela (mother of the deceased-Rameshbhai Ukabhai Vaghela) and Damyantiben (widow of the deceased-Rameshbhai Ukabhai Vaghela) in the ratio of 40:60 respectively, monthly/quarterly/six-monthly, as may be demanded by them from the Manager of the Bank. Civil Application is disposed of.

Learned advocate, Ms. Vasavdatta Bhatt submitted that though driver of ST bus was not liable for the accident in question as he was driving the bus on the correct side of the road on a moderate speed, the Tribunal has fastened liability on the ST Corporation to the extent of 10% for the negligence of its driver and thereby committed a grave error.

Learned advocate, Mr. R.R. Marshall, submitted that after considering the oral as well as documentary evidence such as FIR and panchnama, the Tribunal has rightly fastened liability of 10% on the ST Corporation as ST bus driver was negligent to the extent of 10% and, therefore, findings arrived at by the learned Tribunal need not be interfered with and, hence, First Appeal No. 101 of 2005 deserves to be dismissed. As far as First Appeal Nos. 63 and 64 of 2005 are concerned, he submitted that amounts awarded by the Tribunal in both the claim petitions are on the higher side and hence, sought to reduce the same to some reasonable extent.

This Court has gone through the impugned judgment and award as well as records and proceedings of Motor Accident Claims cases.

As per the deposition of driver of ST bus driver-Ishwarbhai at Ex. 66, as tyre of AMC tanker was burst, the driver of the tanker was compelled to take his tanker on the wrong side by breaking the road divider and collided with the ST bus and incident in question took place. He further deposed that he was driving the bus with moderate speed on the correct side of the road. It is to be noted that evidence of ST bus driver has not been materially challenged.

It is deposed by driver of AMC tanker-opponent No. 3 on oath that as tyre of the tanker was burst, he took the tanker on the wrong side and dashed with the ST bus and accident took place.

It is pertinent to note that complaint was lodged by driver of ST bus, who received severe injuries on various parts of his body and it clearly shows that driver of AMC tanker-opponent No. 3 was solely negligent for causing the accident. Inspite of that the Tribunal has wrongly fastened liability to the extent of 10% for negligence on the part of ST bus driver and, therefore, in the opinion of this Court, entire liability is required to be fastened on Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and, therefore, findings of the Tribunal of holding the ST bus driver negligent to the extent of 10% requires to be quashed and set aside and ST is required to be exonerated from liability.

Accordingly, First Appeal Nos. 63 and 64 of 2005 filed by Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation are partly allowed. First Appeal No. 101 of 2005 filed by ST Corporation is allowed. ST Corporation is hereby exonerated from liability to pay compensation and Driver-Ishwarbhai Ramanbhai Bhoi of tanker of AMC and Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation are liable to pay the entire amount of compensation as awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal is directed to disburse the remaining amount of compensation as ordered by a Division Bench of this Court as per paragraph No. 4 of this judgment. Impugned judgment and award is modified only to the aforesaid extent. Rest of the impugned award remained unaltered. Amount, if any, deposited by the ST Corporation before this Court shall be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal.

Office shall place a copy of this judgment in each matter. Office is directed to send back the records and proceedings, if any, forthwith.