FA/558/1986 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No. 558 of 1986 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI ========================================================= GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION - Appellant(s) Versus CHAMPABEN WIDOW OF JANAKRAY JETHALAL YADAV & 4 - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR HARDIK C RAWAL for Appellant(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED for Defendant(s) : 1 - 2,4 - 5. UNSERVED-EXPIRED (R) for Defendant(s) : 3, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 14/03/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. By way of this First Appeal, filed by the S.T Corporation, the Corporation has challenged the judgement and award dated 24.06.85 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, PanchMahal at Godhra in MACP No. 746 of 1983 whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,17,000/- by way of compensation payable to the original claimants by the original opponents. FA/558/1986 2/4 JUDGMENT 2. The original claimant had filed claim petition claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 2,50,000/- in respect of the accident which occurred on 27.07.83 at about 3.30 p.m on Godhra-Dahod Highway near Godhra Town while the original opponent no.1 was driving the S.T bus bearing no. GRR 8765. The bus hit one now deceased Janakray Jethalal Yadav while he was on his bicycle. The original claimants who are the widow and the parents of the now deceased Janakray filed claim petition under the said circumstance. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award. 3. Learned counsel for the S.T Corporation has contended that the Tribunal has committed an error in holding that the original claimant received injury as a result of the accident that occurred because of the negligent driving of the S.T bus driver. He has further contended that the Tribunal ought to have accepted the version of the bus driver Ex. 56 and the injury on the now deceased as reflected in the post mortem notes as against the evidence on record. He has contended that having crossed the road from the FA/558/1986 3/4 JUDGMENT wrong side and dashed with the rear portion of the bus, the negligence of the deceased should have been assessed at 25%. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the materials placed on record including the award of the Tribunal. The Tribunal in para nos. 5 and 6 has gone through the evidence in detail and has come to the conclusion that the S.T corporation cannot be absolved from the liability to pay compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by the original claimant. The Tribunal has observed that it can be seen that after the bus had dashed with the cyclist, the driver of the bus stopped the bus at a distance of 25 to 30 feet when the passengers had shouted. The Tribunal has also relied upon the eye witness Ex. 35 who has said that the now deceased was going on the correct side and that the bus came at an excessive speed and on the wrong side of the road thereby dashing with the now deceased. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings adopted and findings arrived at by the Tribunal and do not see any reason for interference in the appeal filed FA/558/1986 4/4 JUDGMENT by the S.T Corporation. 5. In the premises aforesaid, the present appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs. (K.S. JHAVERI, J.) Divya//