THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS APPEAL No.2937 of 2003 Date:18.11.2010 Between: The Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, Vizianagaram and another ..... Appellants AND Pitta Ramanamma and others .....Respondents Counsel for the Appellants: Sri C. Appaiah Sarma Counsel for Respondents: Sri Venkateswara Rao Gudapati The Court made the following: ORDER: For the death of a seventeen years old cooli in an accident involving bus belonging to the appellants, the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Vizianagaram (for short ‘the Tribunal’) has awarded a sum of Rs.1,10,000/- as compensation in favour of respondent No.1, who is the mother of the deceased. Feeling aggrieved by the said award, the appellants have filed the present C.M.A. At the hearing, the learned standing counsel for the appellants, mainly submitted that the finding of the Tribunal that the accident had occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the appellants cannot be sustained. The learned counsel further submitted that the evidence on record shows that there is contributory negligence on the part of the driver of the auto in which the deceased along with other passengers was travelling. A perusal of the record shows that an F.I.R. was registered, which was marked as Ex.A-1, against the driver of the bus. According to the driver of the appellants, who was examined as R.W.1, the right side bumper of his bus hit the auto coming on the opposite direction and that the auto was dragged by the bus to some distance resulting in instantaneous death of as many as five persons and causing injuries to one person. The Tribunal has placed reliance on Ex.A-3 - M.V.I. report and Ex.A-4 - charge sheet and the manner in which the gruesome accident had taken place leading to the death of as many as five persons, in coming to the conclusion that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus alone and that there is no negligence on the part of the driver of auto. On a careful consideration of the evidence on record, I have no reason to take a different view on this aspect. Indeed this is a case where the doctrine of res ipsa loquitor can be safely applied. The fact that the auto, which was travelling on the opposite direction, was hit by the right portion of the front bumper of the bus itself shows that the auto was travelling on its left side, when the bus has hit through its right bumper. The further fact that the auto was dragged to some distance causing instantaneous death of five of the inmates of the auto also proves that the bus was being driven at a high speed and in a negligent manner. No submissions on the quantum of compensation have been advanced. At any rate, the award of Rs.1,10,000/- for the death of a cooli aged seventeen years cannot be said to be either unreasonable or excessive. For the aforementioned reasons, I do not find any ground to interfere with the award of the Tribunal. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is accordingly dismissed. As a sequel to dismissal of the C.M.A., interim orders dated 13.08.2003 and 16.07.2004 passed in C.M.A.M.P.Nos.17723 of 2003 and 12144 of 2004 respectively are vacated and C.M.A.M.P.Nos.17723 of 2003 and 12144 of 2004 are dismissed as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 18th November, 2010 L.R. Copies to be marked. GHN