THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH M.A.C.M.A.No.2758 of 2002 JUDGMENT: The present appeal is filed by the claimant aggrieved by the order, dated 06-02-2002, passed in O.P.No.159 of 2000 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad (for short “the Tribunal”), wherein the learned Judge dismissed the said O.P. The parties herein are referred to as they are arrayed before the Tribunal. It is the case of the petitioner that on 17-07-1999 at about 6.00 p.m. while he was proceeding on a Luna bearing No.ABM-4775, as pillion rider along with R.Narsing Rao, who was riding the said Luna, and reached near Bahadurpura X road, one APSRTC bus bearing No.AP-9-Z-3384 came in a rash and negligent manner from back side and dashed against the said Luna, as a result of which, the petitioner, who was a pillion rider, fell down and the left tyre of RTC bus ran over his right leg, which resulted in fracture to his right leg. Immediately, he was shifted to the Osmania General Hospital, Hyderabad, for treatment. He was a manufacturer of chappals and shoes and used to earn Rs.5,000/- per month. He claimed Rs.2,000/- towards loss of earnings from 17-07-1999 to 01-10-1999, Rs.10,000/- towards extra nourishment and medicines, Rs.2,000/- towards damages to clothing, Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.66,000/- towards permanent disability. In all, the petitioner claimed compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. The respondents filed counter denying the allegations made by the petitioner and stating that the amount claimed by the petitioner is excessive. The Tribunal, after considering the oral as well as documentary evidence, held that Ex.A-1-CC of FIR does not show that left front tyre of APSRTC bus ran over the petitioner. Even, the petitioner failed to examine the complainant, R.Narsing Rao, who was riding the Luna. As per Ex.B-1, the criminal case filed against the driver of RTC bus in C.C.No.54 of 2000 on the file of the II Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, was ended in acquittal by order, dated 18-03-2000, as both the driver as well as the petitioner filed a petition under Section 320 (8) Cr.P.C. for compounding the offence. Accordingly, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the accident in question had not occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of APSRTC bus. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal having held that the petitioner failed to examine the Doctor, who treated him and also the Doctor, who is said to have issued Exs.A-6 and A-7, dismissed the said O.P. by order, dated 06-02-2002. Aggrieved thereby, the present appeal is filed by the petitioner. Heard both the counsel and perused the material available on record. To prove the case of the petitioner, he himself examined as PW.1 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-7. To prove the case of the respondents, RWs.1 and 2 were examined and marked Ex.B-1. The petitioner, who is examined as PW.1, stated that on 17-07-1999 at about 6.00 p.m., while he was proceeding on Luna as a pillion rider and reached near Bahadurpura X roads, one APSRTC bus bearing No. AP-9-Z-3384 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed the said Luna, as a result of which, he fell down and the left front tyre of APSRTC bus ran over his right leg. The driver and conductor of the said bus removed him from the bus. The rider of the Luna one R.Narsing Rao gave complaint to the police. He was shifted to the Osmania General Hospital, where he took treatment as inpatient for one week. The Luna was completely damaged. He sustained injuries to his right leg and other parts of the body. An operation was conducted and skin grafting was done. After discharge from Osmania General Hospital, he took treatment as outpatient under a private Doctor. He was a shoemaker and repairer. He was earning Rs.5,000/- per month. Therefore, he filed the said O.P. claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-. The driver of APSRTC was examined as RW.1. He stated that on 17-07-1999 at 5.45 p.m. at Bahadurpura Station, while he was proceeding in bus bearing No.AP-9Z-3384 from Tadbun to Afzalgunj on route No.251, he stopped the bus due to red signal and started the bus when green light came and he heard sound from the left side rear portion of the bus. Then, he stopped the bus and got down from the bus and observed that three persons, who were travelling on a Luna, had fallen down. He took the injured to a private hospital. He went to the police station and informed the incident. He received summons from the criminal court. The criminal case filed against him was ended in acquittal. Ex.B-1 is the certified copy of the order in C.C.No.54 of 2000. According to him, the accident took place due to hit made by the rider of Luna to his bus and there were no laches on his part. In the cross-examination, he stated that as per the training given to him, he has to maintain the distance from one bus to another vehicle to a tune of 50 feet. The suggestion that he was driving the bus in a rash and negligent manner was denied. He has not filed any proof into the Court to show that he stated to the police that three persons were travelling on the Luna and that due to the fault of the rider of the Luna only, the accident occurred. The suggestion that compromise was effected at his request so as to save his job was denied. RW.2, who is a conductor of the said bus, stated that when the bus was stopped at Bahadurpura due to red signal, five passengers boarded the bus and he was checking their passes. When green signal was given, the bus was started suddenly. He heard the sound from left side rear portion of the bus. Then, he got down the bus and observed three persons on Luna. It is stated that due to starting of bus on account of green light, the Luna driver lost control and touched the bus. He has also observed that tyre of the bus touched the leg of the petitioner and he along with RW.1 has taken the petitioner to the Hospital. According to him, there was no rash and negligent driving on the part of driver of the bus, but the accident occurred due to the fault of the rider of the Luna. In the instant case, Ex.A-1-report was given by R.Narsing Rao, who was riding the Luna. As per the said complaint, while he was passing through Bahadurpura X road on his Luna, RTC bus bearing No.AP-9-Z-3384, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, came behind the Luna and dashed it, as a result of which, the pillion rider M.G.Mallaiah, the petitioner fell down and received severe bleeding injury to his right leg and his Luna was damaged. M.G.Mallaiah was shifted to a private Hospital. Though the complainant was not examined, as per the contents of Ex.A-1- FIR, claim petition and oral evidence of PW.1 coupled with the evidence of RWs.1 and 2 as well as Ex.B-1 go to show that a criminal case was registered against the driver of the bus under Section 304-A IPC and the same was ended in acquittal in view of compromise under Section 320 (8) Cr.P.C. The fact that the petitioner being the injured also filed an application before the Criminal Court for compromising the case goes to show that compounding of offence is only done at the request of the driver of APSRTC bus. I n N.K.V.BROS (P) LIMITED Vs. KARUMAI AMMAL AND OTHERS[1], the Apex Court held that merely because the criminal case was ended in acquittal, it cannot be said that civil suit must be followed and is liable to be rejected. The requirement of culpable rashness under Section 304-A IPC is more drastic than negligence and is sufficient under the law of tort to create liability. In the said case, even though the criminal case was ended in acquittal by the trial court, still the Tribunal held that the accident was occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus, which was upheld by this Court, and on a Special Leave Petition, the Apex Court also upheld the judgment of this Court. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that as it is the specific case of the petitioner, as reported in Ex.A- 1-FIR, that the APSRTC bus only came behind the Luna and dashed it, as a result of which, the petitioner fell down and the front tyre of the bus ran over his right leg, I am of the opinion that due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of bus only the accident occurred. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, both the driver and the cleaner of RTC bus admitted that they have shifted the petitioner to the Hospital and Ex.A-2 is the discharge and follow up card of Osmania General Hospital, where he took treatment from 17-07-1999 to 24-07-1999. He also filed certain medical bills for a sum of Rs.3,485/- under Ex.A-4. He also filed Ex.A-6-Medical Certificate issued by C.D.R. Hospital and Ex.A-7- Disability Certificate issued by Dr.M.Nagi Reddy. But, however, no doctor was examined to prove Exs.A-6 and A-7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the fact that no doctor was examined, I am of the opinion that the ends of justice would met if an amount of Rs.25,000/- is awarded towards no-fault liability under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part awarding compensation of Rs.25,000/- along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of petition till realisation. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________ 15-07-2010 Prv [1] AIR 1980 SUPREME COURT 1354