Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3
PETITIONER:
RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
NARAIN SHANKER & ANR. ETC. ETC.
DATE OF JUDGMENT30/01/1980
BENCH:
KRISHNAIYER, V.R.
BENCH:
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
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3
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]
JUDGMENT:
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
868
from liability for tort, to make effective provision for
disablement in cases of undeserved want-Aritcle 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
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3
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.
869