15 years after soldier’s death, Uttarakhand High Court rejects bus authority ‘cyclist’ defense, upholds Rs 28.91 lakh award

The court directed the insurance company to deposit the amount of compensation before the claims tribunal within two months.

Findings

• The Tribunal has rightly held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the UPSRTC bus, which collided from behind with a stationary truck.
• The defence sought to be raised by the appellant that the accident occurred due to a sudden appearance of a cyclist remained unsubstantiated.
• Significantly, the driver of the bus, who was the most material witness to support such a plea, was not examined. In the absence of any cogent evidence to dislodge the claimants’ version, the finding on negligence cannot be said to be perverse or contrary to the material on record.
• As regards the determination of compensation, the tribunal has assessed the income of the deceased on the basis of reliable documentary evidence, including the salary certificate and service record, and has excluded inadmissible components while computing the monthly income.
• The deduction of one-third towards personal and living expenses is in conformity with settled law, keeping in view the number of dependents.
• The tribunal has applied the multiplier of 16, which is appropriate for the age of the deceased.
• The addition towards future prospects has also been rightly granted, considering that the officer was a permanent employee in the Indian Army.
• The compensation awarded under conventional heads and the rate of interest granted are also reasonable and in consonance with settled principles.
• The tribunal has undertaken a careful and judicious exercise in determining the compensation and has neither ignored material evidence nor misapplied the law.
• The appellant has failed to demonstrate any perversity, illegality, or material irregularity in the impugned award so as to justify interference in appellate jurisdiction.

Background

• The case of the claimants, was that the late army officer was travelling as a bona fide passenger in a bus which was proceeding from Bareilly towards Tanakpur on the Bareilly-Pilibhit road.
• It was alleged that the bus was being driven at a very high speed and in a rash and negligent manner. While driving, the bus driver lost control and the bus collided from behind with a stationary truck parked on the roadside.
• As a result of the collision, the officer sustained injuries and was immediately taken to the hospital where he succumbed to his injuries during treatment.
• It was stated that he was serving in the Indian Army (5 guards regiment) as a naik and earning a regular salary along with allowances.
• The claimants asserted that due to his untimely death, they had suffered irreparable loss of dependency, love and affection, and financial security.
• The claim petition was filed by the minor children of the deceased through their mother and natural guardian, along with the widow of the deceased.
• The appellant-Corporation filed its written statement denying the allegations of negligence.
• According to the appellant, the accident occurred due to a sudden appearance of a cyclist on the road, in an attempt to save whom the driver applied brakes, resulting in the bus colliding with a stationary truck.
• The tribunal observed that no convincing evidence was led by the appellant to establish the defence of sudden appearance of a cyclist.
• Applying the multiplier of 16, deducting one-third towards personal expenses, and adding amounts under conventional heads, the tribunal assessed the total compensation at Rs 28.91 lakh.
• Feeling aggrieved by the order, the transport corporation approached the high court.