1 S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO. 54/2004 (R.S.R.T.C. Vs. Smt.Shanti Devi) Date of Judgment : 12-09-2008 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE GUMAN SINGH Mr.Virendra Agrawal, for the appellants. Mr.M.I.Beg, for the respondents. This appeal has been preferred by the Rajasthan Road Transport Corporation against the award passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ajmer vide order dated 3.10.2003 whereby a sum of Rs.16,18,920/- was awarded by way of compensation for the death of deceased Badrilal Sharma. 2 Learned counsel appearing for RSRTC has challenged the appeal on the ground that accident had occurred on account of negligence of motor cycle driver and the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate issue no.1 pertaining to negligence. The other ground for challenge in the appeal is that the learned Tribunal has committed arithmetical error in computing the compensation while deducting 1/3rd salary of the deceased as against his own expenses. 2 3. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-claimants has supported the judgment of the Tribunal on the ground that the learned Tribunal has considered the evidence adduced before it during the inquiry and finding on the point of negligence was also given in right perspective on appreciation of evidence. 4. After hearing the rival contentions, and going through the award as also record of the case, it is revealed that from the perusal of Ex.6, site inspection report of the place of occurrence prepared by the police during investigation, it is clear that RSRTC bus was going from North to South on the city road where other traffic was also in flow from both sides. The learned counsel for the appellant has tried to impress on the point that the motor cycle should have overtaken the bus from right side instead of proceeding from left side of the bus, and as such, RSRTC cannot be held liable for the negligence. In this regard, it may be observed that the traffic was not flowing on the highway but it was flowing on the city road and all types of vehicles are supposed to pass from road in a 3 fashion that the heavy vehicles should adopt right side of the road and light vehicles should pass from left side thereof as per their lane required to be adopted in a city, as such, it cannot be expected from the motor cyclist that he should have crossed the road from the right of RSRTC bus as in fact he was not over-taking the bus but he was going ahead on the road on his side of the road and as such, it cannot be said that motor cyclist was at fault. In view of above discussion, the findings arrived at by the learned Tribunal seems to be without any fault and calls for no interference. As regards the quantum of compensation, arithmetic calculation has been made while computing the compensation as indicated by learned counsel for the appellant which is required to be corrected. The monthly income of deceased is found to be Rs.10,600/- and after deducting 1/3rd amount, Rs.7772/- in place of Rs.8744/- was to be calculated by the Tribunal and hence this correction is to be carried out and the compensation deserves to be awarded by computing the same as under: 7772x12x15(multiplier)=13,98,960/-. 5. Accordingly, while maintaining other terms of 4 the award, the award is modified and total award is to be scaled down from Rs.15,73,920/- to Rs.13,98,960/-. The appeal is disposed of accordingly. (GUMAN SINGH),J. Srawat/- item no.65