Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
R S R T C Jaipur vs Ram Kali Bai & Ors on 26 February, 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR JUDGMENT S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2523/2007 (RSRTC Versus Ram Kali Bai & Others) Date of Judgment :: 26th February, 2013 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA Mr. V.S. Yadav, counsel for the appellant Mr. Sanjay Singhal, counsel for the respondents BY THE COURT:
This appeal has been filed against the judgment and award dated 26.3.2007 passed by MACT. Brief facts of the case are as under:-
On 7.4.2005 deceased Badri Lal and his brother-in-law were going on two separate cycles after making purchases from the market towards their house and as soon as both of them reached the crossing near Police Station at around 2.30 PM, one RSRTC bus no. RJ-14P-3057 which was going from Govindgarh to Hastera and being driven rashly and negligently, came at its wrong side and hit Badri Lal. Badri Lal was admitted in hospital and during treatment, he died on 20.4.2005 due to the injuries received by him in the accident.
After few days FIR was lodged on 18.5.2005. Thereafter claim petition was filed by the claimants. Notices were issued, reply was filed, issues were framed, evident was submitted and after hearing both the sides, an award of Rs. 4,15,800/- has been passed by the Tribunal in favour of the claimants and against the non claimants.
Against the said judgment and award dated 26.3.2007, this appeal has been submitted by the RSRTC challenging the quantum of compensation.
Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the impugned judgment and award has not been passed by the learned Tribunal on the basis of evidence submitted by both the parties, hence the impugned judgment and award being contrary to material on record, deserves to be quashed and set-aside. Learned counsel has further pointed out that in this case, accident took place on 7.4.2005 and Badri Lal died on 20.4.2005 and thereafter the FIR was lodged on 18.5.2005. He has further contended that no explanation has been given by the successors of the deceased as to why they lodged the FIR after the long delay. He has further contended that AW-1 was interested witness being brother-in-law of deceased Badri Lal. There is no other independent eye witness of the accident except AW-1 Dhara Singh. He has further contended that the learned Tribunal has been swayed by the fact that FIR was lodged against the bus of RSRTC and its driver and charge sheet was filed against the driver in the instant case and Naksha Moka was chalked out after the death of deceased Badri Lal. He has further drawn the attention of this Court regarding age and income of the deceased and contended that excessive income has been awarded by the learned Tribunal. Hence, the same deserves to be quashed and set-aside.
On the other hand, Mr. Sanjay Singhal, learned counsel for the respondents has pointed out that after accident, Badri Lal remained in serious condition as he was hit by the bus of RSRTC. Thereafter he died on 20th April, 2005 and after a period of 18 days, the FIR was lodged. The claimants have given the explanation of delay in claim petition as well as in the statement recorded U/s. 161 CrPC before the Investigation Officer and after completion of investigation, the police filed the charge sheet against the driver of RSRTC (appellant). The accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of RSRTC Bus. The learned Tribunal after considering each and every aspect of the matter, has rightly passed the just and apposite award, which does not call for any intervention.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and award dated 26.3.2007 passed by the learned Tribunal. The learned Tribunal after considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and taking into consideration the oral as well as documentary evidence placed before it, is found to have rightly passed the judgment and award, hence I do not think it proper to interfere in the same and the appeal filed by the non claimant being bereft of any merit deserves to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly after confirming the judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal.
(MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA),J.
DK All corrections made in the judgment / order have been incorporated in the judgment / order being E-mailed.
Dilip Khandelwal P