Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

UTTAR PRADESH STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORP.THRU' REGIONAL MGR. versus JOGI RAM & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corp.Thru' Regional Mgr. v. Jogi Ram & Others - FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 2340 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 14576 (27 August 2007)

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

Hon.Pankaj Mithal,J.

Heard Sri V.K. Ojha, learned counsel for the appellant.

The claimant respondent No. 1 Jogi Ram was a bona fide passenger travelling in U.P., Roadways Bus No. 15-D-0167 from Delhi to Meerut on 13.3.2000. Unfortunately the bus met with an accident with another bus No. U.P.15-D-1735 which also being run by the U.P. Roadways under contract. In the said accident the claimant- respondent No. 1 sustained serious bodily injuries. On the claim petition preferred by the claimant-respondent the tribunal by the impugned judgment and order dated 20.9.2006 awarded compensation of Rs. 15,000/- and apportioned the liability for the payment of compensation in the ratio of 40:60% upon the owners of both the buses.

Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the apportionment of the liability in the ratio of 40: 60 % is incorrect and it should have been equally divided. No doubt where the driver of both the buses are negligent in driving the buses the normal rule is to apportion the liability equally. However, the Tribunal has recorded a finding that the bus in which the claimant-respondent was travelling was on the wrong side at the time of accident. Therefore, the the bus No. U.P. 15-D-0167 was more at fault. Thus, the tribunal has not committed any error in fixing its liability to the extent of 60%.

Learned counsel next argued that the compensation awarded is on the higher side. The said argument is without any substance as only a sum of Rs. 15,000/- has been awarded in compensation out of which 5,000/- has been awarded on account of mental and physical pain etc., and Rs. 2,500/- as travelling allowance. Thus Rs. 7,500/- has been awarded for medical treatment. The compensation awarded is not at all excessive. Therefore, the appeal lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.

27.8.207

SKS (2340-07)


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.