Rajasthan State Road Transport
Corporation, Jaipur Vs. Narain Shanker & ANR [1980] INSC 15 (30 January
1980)
KRISHNAIYER, V.R.
KRISHNAIYER, V.R.
PATHAK, R.S.
CITATION: 1980 AIR 695 1980 SCR (2) 866 1980
SCC (2) 180
ACT:
Motor Vehicles Act 1939, S. 110A and
Constitution of India 1950, Article 41-Accident claim-State Transport
Corporation-Duty of.
HEADNOTE:
The respondents lost their limbs in a road
accident while travelling in a bus belonging to the petitioner, a nationalised
transport system. The plea by the operator to escape the liability for
compensation was that the lights of the bus accidentally failed, which resulted
in the accident.
The Accidents Claims Tribunal negatived the
plea and awarded compensation in sums far lower than were claimed by the
respondents.
In the special leave petitions to this Court,
the petitioner contested the application of the principle of res ipsa loquitur
and the quantum of the claim.
Dismissing the petitions,
HELD: 1. (i) It was improper of the
Corporation to have tenaciously resisted the claim. [868 A] (ii) It was right
on the part of the Tribunal to have raised a rebuttable presumption on the
strength of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. [868 B]
2. The heads of claim have been correctly
appreciated by the Tribunal and the awards have been moderate. [868 C]
3. Instead of indulging in wasteful
litigation, it would have been more humane and just, if the Corporation had
hastened compassionately to settle the claims so that goodwill and public
credibility could be improved. [867 H]
4. The State has a paramount duty, apart from
liability for tort, to make effective provision for disablement in cases of
undeserved want-Article 41 of the Constitution states so. [868 A]
5. Nationalisation of road transport should
have produced a better sense of social responsibility on the part of the
management and drivers. One of the major purposes of socialisation of transport
is to inject a sense of safety, accountability and operational responsibility
which may be absent in the case of private undertakings whose motivation is
profit making regardless of risk to life. [867 E-F]
6. Common experience on Indian high-ways
disclose callousness and blunted consciousness on the part of public
corporations which acquire a monopoly under the Motor Vehicles Act in plying
buses. It is a pity that State Road Transport vehicles should become mobile
menaces. [867 G]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave
Petition (Civil) Nos. 6698-6700 of 1979.
867 From the Judgment and Order dated
25-10-1978 of the Rajasthan High Court in D. B. Civil Misc. Appeal Nos. 195,
196 and 197 of 1978.
Soli J. Sorabjee Soli. Genl. and Sobhagmal
Jain for the Petitioner.
M. N. Shroff for the Respondent.
The Order of the Court was delivered by
KRISHNA IYER, J.-These three petitions for special leave relate to a road
tragedy where many lost their limbs while travelling in a bus belonging to the
nationalised transport system of Rajasthan. A flimsy plea was put forward by
the operator to escape liability for compensation that the lights of the bus
accidentally failed and thus the unfortunate episode occurred. Other
embellishments were also set up for the purpose of exoneration. The Accidents
Tribunal was not taken in and, having disbelieved the evidence, awarded
compensation in sums far lower than were claimed by the victims.
Two contentions were raised and rightly
over-ruled and they have been repeated in the Petition for special leave and we
similarly reject them. The nature of the accident and the surrounding
circumstances are such that the doctrine res ipsa loquitur was rightly invoked
by the court. Indeed, the terrible accidents attributable to reckless driving
and escalating year after year make our high-ways great hazards.
One should have thought that nationalisation
of road transport would have produced a better sense of social responsibility
on the part of the management and the drivers. In fact, one of the major
purposes of socialisation of transport is to inject a sense of safety,
accountability and operational responsibility which may be absent in the case
of private undertakings, whose motivation is profit making regardless of risk
to life; but common experience on Indian high-ways discloses callousness and
blunted consciousness on the part of public corporations which acquire a
monopoly under the Motor Vehicles Act in plying buses. It is a thousand pities
that our State Road Transport vehicles should become mobile menaces, and we
should impress upon them the need to have greater reverence for human life
representing, as they do, the value-set of the State itself.
In the present case, the State Corporation
put forward a false plea and contested the application of the principle of res
ipsa loquitur to avoid liability. It would have been more humane and just if,
instead of indulging in wasteful litigation, the Corporation had hastened
compassionately to settle the claims so that goodwill and public credibility
could be improved. After all, the State has a paramount duty, apart from liability
for tort, to make effective provision for disablement in cases of undeserved
want-Article 41 of the Constitution states so. It was improper of the
Corporation to have tenaciously resisted the claim. It was right on the part of
the Tribunal to have raised a rebuttable presumption on the strength of the
doctrine of res ipsa loquitur.
The State Corporation has contested even the
quantum of the claim. Indian life and limb cannot be treated as cheap, at least
by State instrumentalities. The heads of claim have been correctly appreciated
by the Tribunal and the awards have been moderate. Here again, the State
Corporation should have sympathised with the victims of the tragic accident and
generously adjusted the claims within a short period. What is needed is not
callous litigation but greater attention to the efficiency of service,
including insistence on competent, cautious and responsible driving.
We have had the advantage of Shri Soli J.
Sorabjee, who represented the Corporation with a characteristic sense of
fairness, but we are unable to desist from making the above observations which
are induced by the hope that nationalised transport service will eventually
establish their superiority over the private system and sensitively respond to
the comforts of and avoid injury to the travelling public and the pedestrian
users of our highways.
We dismiss the Special Leave Petitions.
N.V.K. Petitions dismissed.
Back
