Research › Browse › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

1993 DIGILAW 244 (MP)

Mubarik Hussain v. Vijay Kumar And Ors.

1993-04-21

A.R.TIWARI

body1993
JUDGMENT A.R. Tiwari, J. 1. This appeal, preferred under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, is directed against the award dated 6.9.1983 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dewas in Claim Case No. 29/80. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the respondent No. 1 is the owner of the car bearing registration No. MPG 1443 and respondent No. 2 was its driver at the relevant time. This car was insured with the respondent No. 3 the National Insurance Co. Ltd. The respondent No. 2 drove this car rashly and negligently and knocked down Mubariya (AW-3) on 10.6.1980 on Bombay-Agra Road. The non-applicant No. 2 did not enter the witness-box. Hence, there was no difficulty in accepting the contention of rashness and negligence. The claimant suffered fracture of right clavicle and fracture of metatorsal of the right leg. No evidence was adduced to prove the permanent disability. The appellant filed the claim petition. The claim was opposed by the respondents. The Tribunal, however, awarded compensation of Rs. 5,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of application (2.9.1980) till realisation of this amount. The appellant has filed this appeal for enhancement in the award of compensation. 3. I have heard Shri G.K. Neema, learned Counsel for the appellant and Shri A.H. Khan, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 3. None appeared for the respondents Nos. land 2. 4. Shri Neema submitted that the amount awarded is too low and deserves to be suitably enhanced. He also submitted that the rate of interest also deserves to be increased. Shri Khan, on the other hand, submitted that the amount of award is quite just and proper, and there is no prayer for increasing the rate of interest in the memorandum of appeal. 5. The linchpin of the claim petition was the permanent disability. Admittedly, this material fact has not been proved. The claimant suffered two fractures of minor nature. He deposed that he was not able to perform his work satisfactorily after the accident. However, this contention was not corroborated by any medical evidence. The claimant-appellant stated that he used to earn Rs. 750/- per month as a black-smith. There is variance between pleading and proof. The monthly earning is, therefore, not satisfactorily proved. He remained as an indoor patient only for six days. However, this contention was not corroborated by any medical evidence. The claimant-appellant stated that he used to earn Rs. 750/- per month as a black-smith. There is variance between pleading and proof. The monthly earning is, therefore, not satisfactorily proved. He remained as an indoor patient only for six days. The Tribunal after taking into consideration die facts and circumstances of the case and placing reliance on 1966 ACJ 244 Indian Trade and General Insurance Co. v. Madhukar held that the appellant was entitled to receive the compensation of Rs. 4,800/- on account of the injuries sustained by him as also on account of the expenses incurred by the appellant in the treatment. An additional amount of Rs. 200/- was allowed on account of damages caused to his bicycle. In my view, the amount of Rs. 5,000/- is thus, just and reasonable compensation as awarded by the learned Tribunal and there is no scope to make any change in this. 6. As regards the rate of interest, it is conceded there is devaluation in the rupee since the date of accident. It is, therefore, necessary to increase the rate of interest from 6 percent per annum to 12 percent per annum so as to partly off-set the impact caused by devaluation in the rupee. 7. In the circumstances, this appeal is allowed only to the extent of interest and the award is modified directing that the respondents shall pay the amount of Rs. 5,000/- to the appellant together with interest @ 12 per cent per annum from the date of application till realisation. 8. The appeal stands partly allowed only to me extent indicated above. 9. The parties are, however, left to bear their own costs of this appeal as incurred. 10. The records of the Tribunal are directed to be returned, immediately.