Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court Limitation | 1,142 Days of Silence: Orissa High Court Rejects Litigant's Claim That His Lawyer Never Called SC/ST Act's Bar on Anticipatory Bail Does Not Apply When Complaint Fails to Make Out Prima Facie Case: Karnataka High Court Oral Agreement for Sale Cannot Be Dismissed for Want of Stamp or Registration: Calcutta High Court Upholds Injunction Finance Company's Own Legal Manager Cannot Appoint Arbitrator — Award Passed by Such Arbitrator Is Non-Est and Inexecutable: Andhra Pradesh High Court District Court Cannot Remand Charity Commissioner's Order: Bombay High Court Division Bench Settles Conflicting Views Framing "Points For Determination" Not Always Mandatory For First Appellate Courts: Allahabad High Court Delhi HC Finds Rape Conviction Cannot Stand On Testimony Where Victim Showed 'Unnatural Concern' For Her Alleged Attacker Limitation in Partition Suit Cannot Be Decided Without Evidence: Karnataka High Court Cheque Dishonour Accused Can Probabilise Defence Without Entering Witness Box — Through Cross-Examination And Marked Documents Alone: Madras High Court Contributory Negligence | No Driving Licence and Three on a Motorcycle Cannot Mean the Victim Caused the Accident: Rajasthan High Court LL.B Degree Cannot Be Ground to Deny Maintenance to Divorced Wife: Gujarat High Court Dried Leaves and Branches Are Not 'Ganja': Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under NDPS Act Family Court Judge Secretly Compared Handwriting Without Telling Wife, Then Punished Her Hesitation: Delhi High Court Quashes Divorce Decree Co-Owner Can Sell Undivided Share in Joint Property Without Consent of Other Co-owners — Sale Deed Valid to Extent of Transferor's Share: Orissa High Court Mandatory Safeguards of Section 42 NDPS Cannot Be Bypassed — Even When 1329 Kg of Hashish Is Seized: Gujarat High Court Affirms Acquittal GST Officer Froze Business Accounts Without Any Legal Basis, Ignored Taxpayer for Three Months: Bombay High Court Imposes Personal Costs Weapon Recovered, But No Forensic Report, No Independent Witness — Allahabad High Court Acquits Murder Accused

Negligent Bus Driver Admits Guilt: Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Loses Claim Case: Andhra Pradesh High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Andhra Pradesh High Court, presided over by HON’BLE JUSTICE Dr. V.R.K.KRUPA SAGAR, dealt a blow to the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (A.P.S.R.T.C.) in a compensation case arising from a bus accident. The court dismissed the appeal filed by A.P.S.R.T.C. against an award by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, underscoring the negligence of the bus driver.

The court observed, “Evidence on record discloses that the accident was out of negligent driving of the offending RTC bus by its driver. There are no merits in what the appellant contends here to say anything contrary to that.”

The case revolved around an incident on September 2, 2017, when a passenger, Sri B. Mohana Rao, aged about 70 years, was injured while alighting from A.P.S.R.T.C. bus No.AP-28-Z-5415. The victim suffered serious injuries to his left leg when the bus moved ahead without noticing him, causing him to fall.

The court further noted, “A man aged at 70 years who was still on his own able to attend his work commuting the public transport now all of a sudden suffered disability because of injuries sustained in this accident. He is now dependent on others at that age. The healthy left leg now became not useful for a proper walk because of the injuries he sustained in the accident. Thus, there is loss of natural endowment.”

Despite the appellant’s argument that there was no certificate from a Medical Board regarding the permanent disability, the court upheld the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal. The tribunal had granted Rs.1,00,000 for permanent disability based on strong medical evidence.

In addition to the permanent disability compensation, the Claims Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.6,47,000 under various heads, including medical expenditure, pain and suffering, and other related expenses. The court found no error in the tribunal’s assessment.

The court also addressed the issue of interest rate, stating, “Section 171 of the Motor Vehicles Act permits the Tribunal to grant reasonable interest on the awarded compensation. The rate of interest as granted by the Nationalized Banks on fixed deposit receipts is considered to be the appropriate rate of interest.”

Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal and directed the appellant, A.P.S.R.T.C., to deposit the awarded amounts with the Claims Tribunal within 30 days from the date of the judgment.

This judgment emphasizes the importance of holding negligent parties accountable in motor accident cases and ensuring fair compensation for the victims.

Date of Decision: 31 October, 2023

Andhra Pradesh State Road  Transport Corporation VS Battulak Mohana Rao   

 

Latest Legal News