JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal has been preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dated 14.11.1994 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in MACT Case No. 244 of 1989 filed by the appellant for compensation of the injuries received by him while travelling in a bus owned by the respondent-Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation. 2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that on 20.8.1988 the appellant Dinesh Mathur, an employee of the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, respondent No. 2, was returning to Udaipur from Jaipur, on duty, by respondent Corporation's bus bearing registration No. RNP 2604, which was driven by respondent No. 1 rashly and negligently. After about thirteen kilometers' run, near Bhankrota, the appellant received injuries on his right arm, which was resting on the window, on account of being struck by the truck which was coming from the opposite direction. The appellant was taken to the SMS Hospital in the same bus. His right elbow was operated and as per the medical board's report the appellant's right elbow was deformed by 20% on account of the incident. 3. The Tribunal, after trial, held that the appellant received injuries due to his own negligence, and absolved respondents from any liability. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that although the appellant should have been careful and should not have rested his elbow on the window of the bus, but primarily it was duty of the driver of the bus, in which the appellant was travelling, to have ensured safety of the passengers and sufficient space should have been left and precaution should have been taken to avoid any type of such incident to occur by the vehicles approaching from the opposite direction. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent supported the impugned judgment and argued that the injuries received by appellant was due to his own negligence, for which the respondent cannot be held liable. 6. I have considered the rival contentions. It is not disputed that while appellant Dinesh Mathur was travelling in the bus of respondent No. 2, sitting with his right elbow protruding out of the window, by the impact of a vehicle approaching from the opposite direction he received the injuries. 6. I have considered the rival contentions. It is not disputed that while appellant Dinesh Mathur was travelling in the bus of respondent No. 2, sitting with his right elbow protruding out of the window, by the impact of a vehicle approaching from the opposite direction he received the injuries. In my view, driver of the bus cannot be absolved from his duty to have ensured adequate distance between the vehicles approaching from opposite direction. In Jamnagar Motor Transport Union (P.) Ltd. v. Gokaldas Pitamber's LRs & Ors., reported in 1966 ACJ 42 , wherein an account of grazing of the two vehicles approaching from the opposite direction, Hon'ble Supreme Court held that it was the duty of the driver to have maintained control over the speed so that no collision would have occurred. In similar facts, this Court in Vimla (Smt.) v. Moolchand & Ors., reported in 2005 RAR 107 (Raj.) , held that it was the duty of the driver of the vehicle to ensure that adequate distance is maintained between the vehicles approaching from the opposite direction. It was further held that failure to do so amounts to negligence and lack of the due care and precaution and as such the driver of such vehicle cannot be absolved of the liability. 7. In this view of the matter the judgment passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City while deciding Issue No. 1 against the appellant, deserves to be set-aside. 8. So far as the quantum of compensation is concerned, learned Tribunal while dealing with Issue No. 3 assessed it at Rs. 15,000/-. Looking to the fact that the appellant Dinesh Mathur suffered 20% deformity in his right elbow on account of this accident, compensation of Rs. 40,000/- would be appropriate. 9. Consequently the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment is set - aside and a compensation of Rs. 40,000/- is awarded in favour of the appellant. The appellant is entitled to get interest at the rate of 6% per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition. The compensation along with the interest amount shall be paid to the appellant within a period of three months from today.Appeal allowed. *******