JUDGMENT 1. - These group of appeals are directed against the judgment and award dated 30th Sept; 1998 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Churu, (hereinafter for short "the Tribunal") in M.A.C.T. case Nos. 50/93, 52/93, 53/93, 54/93 and 57/93 whereby the learned Tribunal awarded compensation in favour of the respondent claimants (hereinafter for short "the claimants") and against the appellant and respondent Nos. 5 to 7. 2. Being aggrieved by the award impugned, the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter for short "the Corporation") filed these five appeals. 3. Brief facts which are necessary to dispose of these appeals are thus : Five claim petitions were filed by the respondent claimants claiming compensation for a sum pleaded in their respective claim petitions, stating therein that on 1-1-90 Banwari Lal, Prakash, Gopal, Raju and Sohan Lal were travelling in a Tempo No. RJ 10/0179 from Ratannagar to Churu, which was driven by Asgar Khan, while the Tempo was little away from Railway crossing, at that relevant time bus No. RNP 3345 owned by the Corporation came from opposite direction, which was driven at a great speedy rashly and negligently by its driver respondent No. 7 collided with the Tempo No. RJ 10/0179. The said tempo was owned by respondent No. 5 Nand Kishore and was validly insured with the Respondent 6 - National Insurance Company. 4. It was further averred that the driver of tempo Asgar Khan was also driving the said tempo negligenty. Due to this accident Banwari Lai Prakash, Gopal, Raju, Sohan Lal and driver of Tempo Asgar Khan sustained severe injuries and ultimately succumbed to injuries. 5. The appellant Corporation and the respondent No. 5 and 6 filed their respective written statements in all the aforesaid claim petitions separately by taking common stand. On the pleadings of the parties, learned Tribunal framed as many as 6 issues. Issue Nos. 1 and 3 were common in all the claim petitions. 6. The learned Tribunal recorded the evidence of the parties and Issue Nos. 1 and 3 which are inter-linked were decided together by the learned Tribunal in all the aforesaid claim cases. On the pleadings of the parties, learned Tribunal framed as many as 6 issues. Issue Nos. 1 and 3 were common in all the claim petitions. 6. The learned Tribunal recorded the evidence of the parties and Issue Nos. 1 and 3 which are inter-linked were decided together by the learned Tribunal in all the aforesaid claim cases. The learned Tribunal reached to the conclusion that the respondent No. 7 Driver of the Corporation's bus was negligent to the extent of 70 per cent for the said accident and the driver of the said tempo was negligent to the extent of 30 per cent. 7. While deciding Issue No. 2 which relates to the quantum of compensation, the learned Tribunal assessed and awarded following compensations : 8. Issue No. 4 and 5 were decided against Respondent No. 5 the Insurance Company. 9. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also examined, and evaluated the evidence on record. 10. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the learned Tribunal erred in deciding the Issue Nos. 1 and 3 against the appellant. It was further contended that the Tribunal failed to appreciate the evidence produced by the Corporation in right perspective while deciding the issue of negligence. It was also contended that it was a case of head on collision between bus and tempo and, therefore, the Tribunal further erred in holding the driver of the Corporation's bus negligent to the extent of 70 per cent. Learned counsel for the claimant as well as respondent insurer supported the finding arrived at by the learned Tribunal. 11. All the claim petitions arose out of one and same accident and the fact of negligence being common in all the aforesaid cases, therefore, for convenience I take the MAC case No. 54/93 as a leading case. 12. It was specifically pleaded by the claimants that when the tempo was little away from Railway Crossing at that time, bus No. RNP 3345 owned by the Corporation came from opposite direction which was driven by its driver respondent No. 7 Nopa Ram rashly, negligently and with great speed, hit the tempo in which aforesaid deceased persons were travelling. 12. It was specifically pleaded by the claimants that when the tempo was little away from Railway Crossing at that time, bus No. RNP 3345 owned by the Corporation came from opposite direction which was driven by its driver respondent No. 7 Nopa Ram rashly, negligently and with great speed, hit the tempo in which aforesaid deceased persons were travelling. The claimants further pleaded that the driver of Tempo Asgar Khan also failed to take proper care and driven the tempo negligently, (except in MAC case No. 52/93 filed by the legal heirs of deceased tempo driver). 13. The corporation filed HINDI MATTER 362079 HINDI MATtER 14. From this pleading of the Corporation it gives clear meaning that at the relevant time, bus was plying on the metal portion of the road having width of 10 feet only as such the bus driver did not give proper side to the tempo coming from opposite direction. On the contrary, the driver of the bus continued to drive bus on the metal portion of the road having hardly width of 10 feet. Under these circumstances, there was hardly space left on the road for the tempo driver and that has resulted in collision of both the vehicles. 15. In the instant case, AW. 3 Sanwar Mal, S. No. MACT case Nos. Parties Name Compensation Awarded by the Tribunal in Rs. 1. 54/93 Mst. Santosh and others v. Nopa Ram and other 1,79,000/- 2. 50/93 Praladram and others v. Nopa Ram and other 1,51,400/- 3. 57/93 Parwati and others v. Nopa Ram and others 1,49,400/- 4. 52/93 Hakamali Khan and others v. Nopa Ram and others 2,00,000/- 5. 53/93 Sohan Lal and others v. Nopa Ram and others 2,68,800/- who was occupant of the said tempo stated on oath before the Tribunal that on 1-1-90 he was travelling in the tempo from Ratan Nagar to Churu which was driven by Asgar Khan, Raju, Prakash, Banwari and Gopal were also travelling in the same tempo. At about 8/8-15 a.m. while the tempo was about a kilometer away from Railway crossing, at that time, bus owned by the Corporation came from side of Churu which was driven by respondent No. 7 Noparam, collided with tempo and due to this accident he sustained injuries on his person. At about 8/8-15 a.m. while the tempo was about a kilometer away from Railway crossing, at that time, bus owned by the Corporation came from side of Churu which was driven by respondent No. 7 Noparam, collided with tempo and due to this accident he sustained injuries on his person. The occupants of the tempo Banwari, Prakash, Raju and Gopal and the driver of tempo Asgar Khan sustained injuries and succumbed to injuries due to the said accident. The claimant placed on record charge sheet Ex. 1 filed by police against respondent No. 7 Nopa Ram, Site Map Ex. 2, and Site Inspection Memo Ex. 3. From these documents, it appears that soon after the accident, a crime report was lodged at the police station Kotwali Churu and after usual investigation, police laid challan against respondent No. 7 for the offences under Section 279, 337, 338 and 304-A, Indian Penal Code. These documents were tendered in evidence by AW 2 Virdhi Ram. He was not cross-examined on this material point by the appellant and the contesting respondents. In rebuttal, NAW 2 Nopa Ram, the Driver of the bus, and NAW 3 Krishan Kumar, Conductor of the bus, were examined. NAW 2 stated that by seeing the tempo coming from opposite direction, he applied the emergency brake and took the bus on the side of road and brought it to halt, despite this tempo came from opposite direction and dashed against the stationary bus. NAW 3 Krishan Kumar also made a similar statement that suddenly driver of bus stopped the bus on a side and took it off the road. At that time tempo came from wrong side and collied with the bus. This part of evidence of both witnesses run contrary to their pleadings as noticed above. No such plea was raised in the written statement. The evidence laid by the Corporation is contrary to the fact pleaded by them in their written statement. It is settled law that no amount of evidence can be read in evidence on the fact which has not been pleaded. There is variance in pleadings and proof and, therefore, testimony of these witnesses is not worth reliance. More so, from the Ex. 2 Site Inspection map and Ex. It is settled law that no amount of evidence can be read in evidence on the fact which has not been pleaded. There is variance in pleadings and proof and, therefore, testimony of these witnesses is not worth reliance. More so, from the Ex. 2 Site Inspection map and Ex. 3 Site Inspection Memo, the stand taken by the Corporation do not find corroboration as in the Site Inspection Map and Site Inspection memo the bus has been shown on the road as also the Corporation pleaded that road was damaged and having hardly width of 10 feat. Had the bus been taken off the road, then it would have caplize as the sides of the road being muddy. From this pleading and statement of witnesses, it is more than clear that the driver of the bus continued to drive the bus on the metal portion of the road and left no space for the tempo driver to safely cross the vehicles each other. 16. "Negligence" means failure to exercise the required degree of care and caution expected of a prudent driver. Negligency is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided upon the consideration which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. The negligence is not always a question of direct evidence, it is an inference to be drawn from proved facts. Where there is duty to exercise care, reasonable care must be taken to avoid acts or omissions, which could be reasonably foreseen to be likely to cause physical injury to person. Degree of care required, of course, depends upon the facts in each case. In the instant case, the respondent No. 7 Nopa Ram the driver of the Corporation was driving the bus on the road, which according to him was damaged having width of 10 ft. At the time of accident, bus was plying on a slope and offending tempo which was also plying from the opposite direction on the same road having the width of 10 ft. At the time of accident, bus was plying on a slope and offending tempo which was also plying from the opposite direction on the same road having the width of 10 ft. Under these circumstances, the driver of the bus as well as driver of the tempo were under legal duty to exercise the care in driving their respective vehicles which includes the reducing the speed of the vehicles, giving proper side or leaving proper space between aforesaid two vehicles while they were in process of crossing each other. From these facts, it is established that the driver of the bus continued to ply the bus on the metal portion of the road leaving no sufficient space for the vehicle coming from opposite direction. Similarly the driver of the tempo also failed to exercise reasonable care to avoid the accident. The drivers of both the vehicles could have reasonably fore-seen likely accident when they continued to drive the respective vehicles on a road having small width. 17. A crime report of this occurrence was lodged at police station Kotwali, Churu, by one Bhagwana Ram wherein it was stated that the bus was driven at a great speed rashly and negligently by its driver and it hit the tempo which was on its correct side of the road. During investigation, the Investigation Officer inspected the site of the accident and prepared map Ex. 2 and Site Inspection Memo Ex. 3. A charge-sheet was laid against the respondent No. 7 Noparam, driver of the Corporation bus for the offences under Sections 379, 337, 338 and 304-A, Indian Penal Code on the basis of the material collected by the Investigating Officer during the investigation. From together reading of Ex. 2 and Ex. 3, it appears that the driver of the tempo also did not take the tempo off the road but continued to drive the tempo on metal portion of road, though, on his side and the driver of the bus was driving the bus with a great speed without leaving any space on road for the tempo coming from opposite direction, his the tempo. The driver of the bus even did not care to apply the brake in order to stop the vehicle before happening of the accident, but violently hit the tempo which resulted in pushing the tempo backward for a distance of 20-25 ft. The driver of the bus even did not care to apply the brake in order to stop the vehicle before happening of the accident, but violently hit the tempo which resulted in pushing the tempo backward for a distance of 20-25 ft. These documents having not been controverted by the appellant. Although Investigating Officer, who prepared Ex-2 and Ex. 3 was not examined but these documents were prepared by the public servant while discharging his official duties and, therefore, are public documents and can be used as corroborative evidence without its formal proof. 18. It was next contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the Tribunal fell in error in not appreciating the evidence of the witnesses NAW 2 Driver and NAW 3 conductor of the bus. Firstly, evidence of these witnesses run contrary to the plea taken by the Corporation in its written statement. Both the witnesses are employees of the Corporation and are interested witnesses, as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 1994 Acc CJ 993 : Haji Zainullah Khan (dead) by LR's v. Nagar Mahapalika, (1994 AIR SCW 5083) Allahabad at para No. 9. Thus, the Tribunal rightly did not rely on the testimony of these witnesses. Therefore, I find no substance in the contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant. 19. It was next contended that there was head on collision between two vehicles and under the circumstances the negligence of both the drivers ought to have been attributed in equal proportions.20-21. In the instant case, as has been noticed above, negligence of the driver of the bus respondent No. 7 is comparatively much more than that of the driver of the tempo. Ordinarily in cases where there is an accident due to the negligence of two or more persons then it is a case of composite negligence and in case of composite negligence both tort feasters are liable jointly and severally but in the instant case from the evidence noticed above, it has been established that the driver of the offending bus was comparatively more negligent than that of driver of tempo. Under these circumstances in my considered opinion finding of the Tribunal holding the bus driver negligence to the extent of 70 per cent and the tempo driver to the extent of 30 per cent, cannot be said to be erroneous. Under these circumstances in my considered opinion finding of the Tribunal holding the bus driver negligence to the extent of 70 per cent and the tempo driver to the extent of 30 per cent, cannot be said to be erroneous. I find no reason to up-set the Tiding arrived at by the Tribunal while deciding issue No. 1 and 3 and the same is here by affirmed.22. It was next contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the compensation awarded In each case by the Tribunal is on higher side. It is settled law that in appeal quantum is interfered only when it is inadequate or too excessive.S.B. Civil Misc. Anneal No. 83/84 (MAC case No. 54/93)23. In the instant case, the deceased Banwari Lal was young person of 35 years of age. He was skilled mason and his monthly income was Rs. 1,600/-. This fact was specifically pleaded by the claimants. AW 1 Smt. Santosh widow of deceased categorically stated before the Tribunal that her husband Banwari Lal was Head Mistri and used to earn Rs. 80/- to 85/- per day and sometimes Rs. 120/- per day. She further stated that the claimants were wholly dependent on the income of the deceased. Testimony of this witness further gains support from the statement of AW 2 Virdhi Ram. Thus, from the un rebutted testimony, the claimants succeeded in establishing the age and income of the deceased. In the instant case, Tribunal awarded a meagre amount of Rs. 1,79,000/-. Obviously it cannot be said to be too excessive, on the other hand if the proper computation is made taking into account future prospects and application of proper multiplier, the compensation would be much higher than what has been awarded by the Tribunal. Thus, the compensation awarded calls for no interference.SB Civil Misc Auoeal No. 84/94 (MAC case No. 50/93)24. In the instant case deceased Prakash was a young person of 20 years of age. He used to undertake masonry work and his monthly income was Rs. 1500/-. This fact was specifically pleaded by the claimants. AW 1 Prahalad stated before the Tribunal that deceased was Mistri and he used to earn Rs. 40-50 per day. Besides this deceased was doing the work of agriculture AW 3 Sanwar Mal and A.W. 4 Hanuntaram both stated before the Tribunal that deceased Prakash used to earn Rs. 50-60/- per day. This fact was specifically pleaded by the claimants. AW 1 Prahalad stated before the Tribunal that deceased was Mistri and he used to earn Rs. 40-50 per day. Besides this deceased was doing the work of agriculture AW 3 Sanwar Mal and A.W. 4 Hanuntaram both stated before the Tribunal that deceased Prakash used to earn Rs. 50-60/- per day. Thus, from unrebutted testimony, the claimants succeeded in establishing the age and income of the deceased. In the instant case, Tribunal awarded a meagre amount of Rs. 1,51,400/-. It cannot be said to be too excessive on the other hand if the proper computation is made taking into account future prospects and application of proper multiplier, the compensation would be much higher than what has been awarded by the Tribunal. Thus the compensation awarded calls for no interference.SB Civil Misc. Appeal No. 85/94 (in MAC case No. 57/9325. In the instant case, the deceased Shankar Lal was young person of 20 years of age at the time of accident. He used to undertake masonary work and his monthly income was Rs. 1200/-. This fact was specifically pleaded by the claimants. AW 1 Dhuda Ram stated before the Tribunal that deceased used to earn Rs. 40/- per day. AW 2 Naparam is brother of the deceased stated that the monthly income of the deceased was Rs. 1,200/- AW 3 Mohadeo stated that deceased used to earn Rs. 40-45/- per day. Thus, from the rebutted testimony, the claimants succeeded in establishing the age and income of the deceased. In the instant case, Tribunal awarded a meagre amount of Rs. 1,49,400/-. Obviously it cannot be said to be too excessive, on the other hand if the proper computation is made taking into account future prospects and application of proper multiplier, the compensation would be much higher than what has been awarded by the Tribunal. Thus the compensation awarded calls for no interference.MACT Anneal No. 86/94 (MAC Case No. 52/M26. In the instant case, deceased Asgar Khan was 20 years of age at the time of accident. he was Tempo Driver and his monthly income was Rs. 1,500/-. This fact was specifically pleaded by the cliamants. AW 1 Hakam Ali stated that the deceased was a young person of 20 years of age and was Tempo Driver and he used to earn Rs. 1,500/- per month. he was Tempo Driver and his monthly income was Rs. 1,500/-. This fact was specifically pleaded by the cliamants. AW 1 Hakam Ali stated that the deceased was a young person of 20 years of age and was Tempo Driver and he used to earn Rs. 1,500/- per month. His statement further finds support and corroborated by the evidence of AW 2 Sanwar Mal and AW 3 Hanuta Ram. Thus, from the unrebutted testimony, the claimants succeeded in establishing the age and income of the deceased. In the instant case, Tribunal awarded a meagre amount of Rs. 2,00,000/-. In the instant case it has been established that deceased Agarkhan himself was negligent to the extent of 30 per cent as has been held by the Tribunal and affirmed by me. Therefore, legal representatives of Asgar Khan normally would be entitled to the compensation to the extent of 70 per cent of the total computation. However, since neither owner of the tempo nor the insurer challenged this part of finding and looking to the small amount awarded by the Tribunal, I do not consider it fit to interfere in the quantum. If the proper computation is made taking into account the future prospects and application of proper multiplier the compensation would have been much more than what was been computed by the Tribunal. Under these circumstances, I am not inclined to reduce the compensation on account of negligence of the deceased himself. Since total award cannot be said to be too excessive. Thus, the compensation awarded calls for no interference.S.B. Civil Misc. Anneal No. 87/93 (MAC case No. 53/9327. In the instant case Gopal aged 20 years and Raju aged about 18 years, both are sons of the claimant succumbed to injuries. It has been established by the claimant's evidence that each of them were earning Rs. 1,400/- per month. AW 1 Sohan Lal, AW 2 Patasi, AW 3 Sanwarmal and AW 4 Hanutaram stated before the Tribunal that the decesed Gopal and Raju both were Mistri and by undertaking the work of Mistri each of them used to earn Rs. 1400/- per month. Thus the claimants succeeded in establishing income and age of deceased Gopal and Raju. The Testimony of claimant's evidence remained unrebutted. The learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,34,400/- each in case of Gopal and Raju as compensation. 1400/- per month. Thus the claimants succeeded in establishing income and age of deceased Gopal and Raju. The Testimony of claimant's evidence remained unrebutted. The learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,34,400/- each in case of Gopal and Raju as compensation. Obviously, it cannot be said to be too excessive, on the other hand if the proper computation is made taking into account further prospects, dependency of the claimants and application of proper multiplier, the compensation would be much more than what has been awarded by the Tribunal. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal calls for no interference.28. No other point was pressed into service. 29. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I find no merit in all these aforesaid appeals. Accordingly, they are hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.Appeals dismissed. *******