1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO.175 OF 1994 1. Bhagwan s/o Rambhau Dhumal, Age: 47 years, Occ. Agriculture. 2. Mahananda w/o Bhagwan Dhumal, Age 42 years, Occ. Household, Both residents of Maslu, Taluka Latur, District Latur. ...APPELLANTS ORIGINAL CLAIMANTS VERSUS 1. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, through its Divisional Controller, Latur. 2. Ramkishan s/o Mahadeorao Gaikwad, Age 33 years, occ. Driver B.No.1636, attached to S.T.Depot, Latur, District Latur. 3. Ashok s/o Nagorao Waghmode, Age major, r/o Aagalgaon, Taluka Barshi, Dist. Solapur. ...RESPONDENTS (Original Respondents) ... Mr. V.G.Sakolkar, Adv.,for the appellants. Mr.R.D.Reddy, Adv., for Mr.P.K.Joshi, Adv., for respondent no.1. Mrs. M.A.Kulkarni, Adv., for respondent no.3. Respondent nos. 1 and 2 served. 2 CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 9th JULY, 2009 *** PER COURT : 1. The dismissal of claim petition by order dt.31st Dec.,1993, is tested in the first appeal. 2. On 13.10.1991, at around 7.15 a.m. On Latur-Ausa Road, near Nandi Stop, deceased Suresh, a Mechanic, was taking trial of a Motor Cycle bearing No.MXU-8827. He was moving from Ram Nagar, Latur, to Ausa Road, from east-west, for trial of the motor cycle. The S.T. Bus was proceeding from Latur-Ausa Road, for Hyderabad. 3. In the accident, deceased succumbed to the injuries on the spot. FIR was lodged by the driver of the Bus/original respondent no.2, at the Police Station. The claim petition was restricted to a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- by the parents. 4. The Counsel for the appellants/claimants drew a sketch, having support to him from the recitals of Panchnama, to highlight as to what could be the nature of the accident and manner of movement of the two vehicles. He tried to impress, the accident was not on account of sheer loss of care or negligence by the deceased but it was the undue haste exerted by the driver in 3 proceeding in excessive speed, embodying negligence on his part, taking toll of precious life of the deceased. 5. I have gone through the panchnama, the inquest and the FIR. The cumulative effect of these documents is illustrative that from any angle the accident in question was not face to face or collision but, it was an impact to the rear right side tyre of the Bus by the deceased. The position of the motor cycle, in a damaged condition, the brakemarks, the blood stains and the pool of blood at the spot also endorse that the accident could not be at rolling over of the front wheel to the head of the deceased. The so called eye witness to the accident is rightly disbelieved by the learned Judge as his version is rebelling to the documents on record. The post mortem examination on the deceased ( Exh.43) indicates that there were no crush injuries to the deceased as there was no rolling of first tyre to him. Column 17 thereof indicates that there was laceration and incised wound. This could not be a result of over-running of wheels of the Bus, which was carrying 50 passengers at the material time. The evidence and the documents rather illustrate the motor cyclist/ deceased had committed an error in crossing the State Highway, ignoring the statutory indications expected to be adhered. The FIR ( Exh.39) in unmistakable 4 terms illustrates that the motor cyclist gave dash to the Bus when the Bus was plying from Latur to Ausa and it was only the thud which gave indication to the Bus Driver that there was some impact to the rear side and he stopped the Bus by taking it little ahead. 6. The analysis of the evidence, cannot be said to be on wild presumptions of the learned Member of the Court or based on surmises, divorced from the record. The findings are in tune with the record and it is rather unfortunate that the precious life of the deceased is lost but for that the S.T.Driver cannot be put to any responsibility. The findings of the learned Judge, in the situation, does not require any interference. Appeal dismissed. No costs. ( K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE agp/fa175-94