IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2008 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 MACA.No. 1243 of 2006(A) -------------------------------- OPMV.3310/1998 of MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. APPELLANT(S): /PETITIONER ---------------------------------- JAYAPRAKASH, S/O.LATE SRI.P.K.VIJAYAN, PAZHAMPILLY HOUSE, CHENDAMANGALAM.P.O, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SEBASTIAN P.A. BAHULEYAN RESPONDENT(S)RESPONDENT: --------------------------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CHANDRASEKHARAN PILLAI, NEENDAKARA.P.O, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.K.PRABHAKARAN, SC, K.S.R.T.C. FOR R1 THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = M.A.C.A. NO. 1243 OF 2006 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 17th day of December, 2008. J U D G M E N T This appeal is preferred against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam in O.P.(MV)3310/98. It is the case of the claimant while he was attempting to board in a K.S.R.T.C. bus driven by the deceased 2nd respondent, the driver took the bus rash and negligently as a result of which he had fallen down from the foot board of the bus resulting in sustainment of injuries. The Tribunal found both the driver as well as the claimant negligent and awarded a compensation of Rs.15,875/- i.e. 50% of the total amount awarded. It is against that decision, the claimant has come up in appeal. 2. Heard the counsel for K.S.R.T.C as well as the appellant. Learned counsel for the appellant had made available before me for perusal a copy of the charge sheet filed before the Magistrate's Court. A reading of the said document would reveal that the place of accident is on the M.A.C.A. 1243 OF 2006 -:2:- side of a road and it is further stated therein that while the passengers were boarding into the bus the driver took the bus in a rash and negligent manner without proper signal and that has resulted in the accident. It is fundamental under the Motor Vehicles Act and Rules that the crew of the bus is expected to take the passengers safely to their destination. Crew of the bus is expected to give signal only after all the passengers have alighted or boarded into the bus. So it is a responsibility cast upon them. When a person has put his leg on the foot board and without signal the bus is moved forward then it has to be held that the driver alone is negligent for the accident. A perusal of the charge sheet also would reveal the whole thing and I do not know how the Tribunal had arrived at a different decision without any other particulars especially when nobody has been examined in the case. So it is this document that had to be relied upon which would show the negligence of the K.S.R.T.C bus driver and therefore the finding on the question of negligence is set aside and I find the accident had taken place only on account M.A.C.A. 1243 OF 2006 -:3:- of the negligence of the K.S.R.T.C. driver. When it is so, the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.31,750/-. So the award of the Tribunal is revised and modified and an award is passed for Rs.31,750/- with 7.5% interest on the said sum from the date of petition till realisation with proportionate costs and the first respondent in the appeal is directed to deposit the same within a period of ninety days from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The MACA is disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-