Dismissed

U.P.S.R.T.C. v. Bir Bahadur Singh and Others

Allahabad HC6 Jan 2021FAFO/617/2000

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court heard an appeal filed by the transport corporation against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award. The tribunal had rejected the claimant's defence of contributory negligence based on driver evidence and a spot map. Finding the appellant failed to rebut this evidence, the court dismissed the appeal. Both parties to bear own costs.

What did the court decide?

Ground of contributory negligence not made out; appeal dismissed; parties to bear own costs.

U.P.S.R.T.C. Vs Bir Bahadur Singh and Others — Allahabad HC (2021) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 1

¶2

Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 617 of 2000

¶3

Appellant :- U.P.S.R.T.C. Respondent :- Bir Bahadur Singh And Others Counsel for Appellant :- Samir Sharma,Sanjeev Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the appellant. None appears for the respondents.

¶6

This appeal has been filed by the Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation being aggrieved of award dated 2.2.2000 passed by 9th Additional District Judge, Bulandshahar in Claim Case No. 138 of 1998 on the sole ground that learned claims Tribunal has not taken into consideration contributory negligence of the jeep in which claimant was travelling.

¶7

Learned counsel for the appellant has drawn attention of this Court to issue no. 2 decided by the learned Claims Tribunal and reading evidence of Kishan Kumar, Driver of the offending bus under the control of the appellant, it is submitted that there is factum of contributory negligence made out on part of the Tata vehicle in which injured was travelling.

¶8

Learned Claims Tribunal has dealt with the evidence of Kishan Kumar who was driver of the offending bus, which was plying between Delhi to Aligarh when accident took place at village Badalpur on G.T. Road. It has taken into consideration the fact that Kishan Kumar denied the factum of any criminal case being pending and admitted that the accident was head on collision. It has also referred to spot map (Nakhsha Najri) 15Ga in which Tata vehicle has been shown to be travelling on its side whereas bus has been shown to have hit on the wrong side. This evidence could not be rebutted by the appellant before the learned Claims Tribunal by producing any independent witness, and therefore, when there is no rebuttal of the evidence available on record, ground of contributory negligence is not made out, therefore, appeal fails and is dismissed.

¶9

Parties to bear own cast.

¶10

Order Date :- 6.1.2021 Arif

U.P.S.R.T.C. v. Bir Bahadur Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

U.P.S.R.T.C. v. Bir Bahadur Singh and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

N.I.A. Co. Ltd. Vs Pratibha Devi

Smt.Kusum Agnihotri and Another Vs Konald Bality and 2 Others

Cholamandalam M.S. General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Smt. Akal and 4 Others

Sunil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Prakash Chandra Vs Kashinath and 9 Others

Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs ajay pal singh and 2 others