Two appeals by a transport corporation and its insurer against a tribunal award granting compensation for injuries and death in a road accident with a bus. The court upheld the tribunal's finding that the bus driver was solely negligent and accepted the deceased's salary as evidenced by salary vouchers, dismissing both appeals.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~6 & 7
| * | IN | THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI |
|---|---|---|
| % | Date of Decision: 3rdDecember, 2024 | |
| + | CM(M) 1383/2022 | |
| UPS | RTC .....Petitioner |
|
| Through: Mr. Aly Mirza, Advocate. |
||
| versus | ||
| 1. | SUJIT KUMAR @ P. SUJITH S/O SH. V. PARAMESWARAN .....Respondent No. 1 |
|
| 7 | 2. | KUNWAR PAL S/O SH. MANSA RAM ….Respondent No. 2 Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate. |
| + | MAC.APP. 410/2022 | |
| UPS | RTC .....Appellant |
|
| Through: Mr. Aly Mirza, Advocate. versus |
||
| 1. | LEELA KRISHNAN W/O LATE SH. RADHA KRISHNAN .....Respondent No. 1 |
|
| 2. | ARYA KRISHNAN D/O LATE SH. RADHA KRISHNAN …Respondent No. 2 |
|
| 3. | AISHWARYA KRISHNAN D/O LATE SH. RADHA KRISHNAN ….Respondent No. 3 |
|
| 4. | AADHYA KRISHNAN D/O LATE SH. RADHA KRISHNAN …Respondent No. 4 |
|
| CM( | M) 138 | 3/2022 & MAC.APP. 410/2022 Page 1 of 8 |
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:SAHIL SHARMA Signing Da te:0 8.01.2025 17:12:14
5. RAJAMMA PILLAI
W/O LATE SH. NARAYANA ….Respondent No. 5 ALL RESIDENTS OF: A 169/F2, SECOND FLOOR, SHYAM APARTMENT, DILSHAD COLONY, EAST DELHI 110095
6. KUNWAR LAL S/O SH. MANSA RAM …Respondent No. 6
Through: Mr. S.N. Parashar, Advocate.
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
J U D G M E N T (oral)
CM(M) 1383/2022 & MAC.APP. 410/2022 Page 2 of 8
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:SAHIL SHARMA Signing Da te:0 8.01.2025 17:12:14
(i) that firstly, it was the head on collision between the scooty and the offending bus; it is a case of contributory negligence of 50% on the part of the deceased; and
(ii) that the salary of the deceased, Sh. Radha Krishnan, has been taken as Rs.38,000/- per month on the basis of Vouchers even though no documentary evidence to corroborate the same, has been produced and no Certificate of the deceased working as a Chef (cook), has been produced by the claimants.
7. Submissions heard.
CM(M) 1383/2022 & MAC.APP. 410/2022 Page 3 of 8
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:SAHIL SHARMA Signing Da te:0 8.01.2025 17:12:14
9. A Detailed Accident Report (DAR) was filed on the basis of Chargesheet, but the Claimants also filed their Claim Petition under Section 166/140 of the M.V. Act. On consideration of evidence, the learned Tribunal granted compensation in the sum of Rs. 34,000/- to inured P. Sujit and Rs.55,09,000/- to the legal heirs of Shri Radha Krishnan (Claimants) along with interest @ 8% per annum.
Contributory Negligence:
CM(M) 1383/2022 & MAC.APP. 410/2022 Page 4 of 8
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:SAHIL SHARMA Signing Da te:0 8.01.2025 17:12:14
of the injured PW2/P. Sujit who had deposed about the manner of the accident, as narrated above. He explained that the Scooty was being driven by Radha Krishnan at normal speed, on the correct side of the road. It was the UP Roadways bus which was being driven at a high speed in a rash and negligent manner, which came from the opposite side and after changing its lane, it hit the Scooty with great force resulting in the accident and consequent injuries to the riders of the Scooty.
CM(M) 1383/2022 & MAC.APP. 410/2022 Page 5 of 8
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:SAHIL SHARMA Signing Da te:0 8.01.2025 17:12:14
Whether it was raining at that particular time when the accident occurred, or not, it is established that there was heavy rains and there may also have been the potholes on the road. Even if the testimony of R1W1 Shri Kunwar Pal is accepted that there were potholes, but it evidently did not deter him from driving the bus at a high speed which is evident from the fact that the Scooty came under the front wheel of the bus; had the speed been slow as has been claimed by R1W1, there is no way that the Scooty would have got crushed under the offending bus. Furthermore, it was the bus which was being driven on the wrong side of the road and the driver of the bus should have been mindful of the traffic which was coming in its right lane.
CM(M) 1383/2022 & MAC.APP. 410/2022 Page 6 of 8
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:SAHIL SHARMA Signing Da te:0 8.01.2025 17:12:14
Hotel has also been placed on record. He deposed that the deceased was working with him as a Chef/Cook and was getting a consolidated salary of Rs.38,000/- per month, for which Vouchers were issued for the months of March, 2018 to July, 2018 which are Ex.PW3/3 collectively. He further deposed that the last salary for the month of July, 2018 was received by the wife of the deceased vide Voucher Ex.PW3/4. He affirmed that he had issued the Certificate dated 15.09.2018 Ex.PW1/19 regarding the employment and salary of the deceased. This witness was cross-examined on behalf of the Respondents, but nothing contradictory could be brought forth to disbelieve his testimony.
20. While the respondents have chosen to question the testimony of PW3, but not an iota of evidence to the contrary had been adduced. There is no ground of interference in regard to the salary of the deceased. Conclusion:
CM(M) 1383/2022 & MAC.APP. 410/2022 Page 7 of 8
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:SAHIL SHARMA Signing Da te:0 8.01.2025 17:12:14
calculated correctly in MACP No.201/2019. There is no merit in the two Appeals, which are hereby dismissed.
(NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA) JUDGE
DECEMBER 3, 2024 RS/VA
CM(M) 1383/2022 & MAC.APP. 410/2022 Page 8 of 8
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:SAHIL SHARMA Signing Da te:0 8.01.2025 17:12:14
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the deceased scooty rider was contributorily negligent in the collision with the UPSRTC bus.
Whether the deceased's salary of Rs.38,000 per month could be accepted based on vouchers without further documentary evidence.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
UPS RTC
Sujit Kumar @ P. Sujith
Kunwar Pal
Leela Krishnan
Arya Krishnan
Aishwarya Krishnan
Neena Bansal Krishna
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 227 of the Constitution invoking the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction over subordinate civil courts.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
