Charanjeet Singh and Another vs Smt. Shanti Devi

Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J.—Since both the aforesaid appeals have been filed against one judgment and award passed by MACT, hence the arguments have been heard together and they are being decided by this common judgment. Brief facts of the case are that on 19.5.2008 at about 8.00 PM deceased Surata Singh @ Surata Ram was going in the marriage party in bus No. RJ 01-PA-0666. The bus was over crowded and as such the deceased sat on the roof of the bus. When the bus reached Narsingh Basni (Chiman Singh Ki Dhani) in Police Station, Thanwla, District Nagaur, the driver of the vehicle without informing the members of the marriage party, took a turn below the electric wires hanging over the road, as a result of which the electric wire touched the body of deceased. On this count, the deceased Surata Singh along-with Dharu Singh suffered burns due to electric shock and felt unconscious and died at the spot.

Thereafter claim petitions were filed, notices were issued, issues were framed, evidence was recorded and after hearing both the sides, the learned Tribunal decreed an amount of Rs. 3,11,000/- in favour of claimants in claim petition no. 211/2009 and Rs. 2,25,000/- in claim petition no. 212/2009, and against the non claimants.

The appellants-non claimants have filed the aforesaid two appeals challenging the quantum of compensation.

Learned counsel for the appellants has contended that the learned Tribunal while deciding issue no. 1 has failed to see that the alleged accident was not caused due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle, instead the same was caused due to sheer negligence on the part of avvnl as the electric wires were hanging only at the height of 11 to 12 feet against the prescribed height of 17 to 18 feet as per the rules of Electricity Department, but this aspect of the matter has been ignored by the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned award and hence, the impugned award and judgment is liable to be quashed and set-aside. He has further contended that the learned Tribunal did not take into consideration the fact that the Electricity Department i.e. avvnl is only responsible for the alleged accident as the Department has taken action against the lineman, who is the Incharge of the electric lines at the relevant time, which goes to show that the accident was caused due to the negligence on the part of avvnl, but the learned Tribunal also failed to appreciate this aspect of the matter, while passing the impugned award.

Having heard the learned counsel for the appellants and carefully perused the impugned award including the relevant material on record, it is noticed that the learned Tribunal while passing the impugned award, in issue no. 1 has categorically observed that at the time of driving the bus, it was the responsibility of the driver to pay proper attention and to drive the bus cautiously, so that the passengers traveling in the bus, may remain safe, but in the instant case, driver of the bus did not pay attention and drove the bus rashly and negligently, as a result of which the passengers sitting on the bus sustained current of high power line. The findings arrived at by the learned Tribunal are found to be just and apposite and do not suffer from any legal infirmity or legal flaw.

For the reasons stated, I do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal and the appeals filed by the appellants being bereft of any merit deserve to be dismissed, which stand dismissed accordingly after confirming the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal. Stay applications also stands dismissed.