Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 1230 (MP)

DINKAR JOSHI v. NITIN TIWARI

2007-11-29

ARUN MISHRA, S.A.NAQVI

body2007
Judgment S.A.Naqvi, J. ( 1. ) Both the appeals are the outcome of same award passed by the IInd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hoshangabad in MVC No. 73/03 whereby MVC filed by the appellant of appeal No. 945/03 Nitin Tiwari has been dismissed and the Tribunal directed that the amount towards no fault liability deposited by the appellant of appeal No. 3201/04 ( Dinkar Joshi) shall be paid to the petitioner Nitin Tiwari. ( 2. ) Admitted facts of the case are that the non-petitioner Dinkar Joshi, was owner of the fiat car No. MP-04C-8092 on the date of accident i.e, 15-1-2000, he was driving the vehicle on the date of accident. ( 3. ) Facts of the case in a nutshell are that on 15-1 -2000, Dinkar Joshi, by driving fiat car No. MP-04C-8092 rashly and negligently dashed the petitioner Nitin Tiwari, Nitin Tiwari, sustained grievous injuries and permanent disability, he spent money on treatment, he was treated in hospital, he claimed compensation amount of Rs. 48,40,000/-. The non-petitioner, Dinkar Joshi by denying the case of the petitioners pleaded that he has not caused accident by driving fiat. Nitin Tiwari was not knowing driving of scooter. At the time of accident, Nitin Tiwari was driving scooter along with his friend Sandip as a pillion rider. The accident occurred due to negligence of Nitin Tiwari. Out of sympathy, he took injured Nitin Tiwari to hospital,he is not liable to pay any compensation amount to the claimant. ( 4. ) The learned Tribunal framed five issues. After hearing learned counsel for both the parties, perused evidence and material on record, dismissed the claim petition by directing that the amount paid by the non-petitioner towards no fault liability shall be paid to the petitioner, aggrieved by the impugned award, both the parties have filed the aforesaid miscellaneous appeals. ( 5. ) We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties in all the four appeals, perused the evidence and material on record. ( 6. ) Learned counsel for the appellant Nitin Tiwari urged that the Tribunal has committed error in appreciating evidence lead by the parties and circumstances of the case, there is sufficient evidence on record to prove that the accident caused by the non-petitioner Dinkar Joshi by driving car rashly and negligently. The Tribunal erred in dismissing the claim petition. ( 6. ) Learned counsel for the appellant Nitin Tiwari urged that the Tribunal has committed error in appreciating evidence lead by the parties and circumstances of the case, there is sufficient evidence on record to prove that the accident caused by the non-petitioner Dinkar Joshi by driving car rashly and negligently. The Tribunal erred in dismissing the claim petition. Contrary to that, learned counsel for the respondent Dinkar Joshi in MA No. 3201/04 urged that learned Tribunal did not commit any error in dismissing the claim petition but erred in directing that the amount deposited by him towards no fault liability shall be paid to the petitioner Nitin Tiwari because Tribunal came to conclusion that the accident is not caused by non-petitioner Dinkar Joshi by driving fiat car hence, he is not liable to pay any amount towards no fault liability. ( 7. ) Nitin Tiwari (Aw-1) deposed that at about 2:15 p.m, he was going on foot along with Sandip Chhutelkar, from behind Dinkar Joshi by driving car rashly and negligently dashed him, he sustained injuries on his back and spinal cord was fractured, the number of the car was MP-04C-8092. Driver of the car, Dinkar Joshi took him to the hospital where he was treated for 9 days, he was treated in Hoshangabad hospital for 24 days. Ashish Tiwari (AW-2) deposed that he was going to his house along with his friend Nitin and his friends were coming from the opposite side. One fiat car came in zig-zag manner and in excessive speed and dashed Nitin. Nitin sustained injuries. The driver of the fiat car took Nitin to the hospital, he has further deposed that,the number of the car was MP-04C-8090 or 8092. Akim Quershi (Aw-3) also corroborated the testimony of Nitin and Ashish Tiwari and deposed that Dinkar Joshi by driving car dashed Nitin. Contrary to that, Abdul Wazhid (NAW-1), Gyanendra Singh(NAW-2) and Dinkar Joshi (NAW-4) deposed that Nitin was driving the scooter and fell down from the scooter, Dinkar Joshi stopped his car and out of sympathy took the injured to the hospital. No accident was caused by Dinkar Joshi by driving vehicle. Dr. Ravindra Gangrade (NAW-3) deposed that Nitin was admitted in hospital for 8 days but he never insisted to lodge FIR. The Police Station is near to the hospital. He proved Bed head ticket Exhibit P-31 dated 15-1 -2000. No accident was caused by Dinkar Joshi by driving vehicle. Dr. Ravindra Gangrade (NAW-3) deposed that Nitin was admitted in hospital for 8 days but he never insisted to lodge FIR. The Police Station is near to the hospital. He proved Bed head ticket Exhibit P-31 dated 15-1 -2000. It is clear from the evidence of Ravindra Gangrade and Exhibit P-31 that vehicular accident is mentioned in the Bed head ticket. No information has been given by Dr. Ravindra Gangrade to Police regarding vehicular accident. The conduct of Dr. Ravindra Gangrade is against rules and norms. The duty of the treating doctor was to inform the police that a person injured in vehicular accident has been admitted for treatment in the hospital. There is no mention in Exhibit P-31 that Nitin Tiwari fell down from the scooter, contrary to that vehicular accident is mentioned in the documents. Dinkar Joshi has also not reported the matter to the Police or stated to the doctor that Nitin Tiwari fell down from the scooter and injured was driving the scooter. No sufficient explanation has been putforth by Dinkar Joshi in this respect, even Dinkar Joshi has not informed the relatives of the injured, he unsuccessfully tried to explain this fact that Nitin told him that he will be on road after some time and he will go to the house. There is no material contradictions in the statement of Nitin Tiwari, Ashish Tiwari and Akim Quereshi. The presence of Dinkar Joshi along with fiat car No. MP-04C-8092 on spot is established by the admission of Dinkar Joshi and evidence lead by both the parties. The appellant came to know that report of accident was not lodged by anyone then he lodged the report Exhibit P-l on 14-2-2000 at Police Station, Hoshangabad. This report contains the facts of the accident and corroborates the factum of accident caused by Dinkar Joshi that by driving fiat car No. MP-04C-8092 rashly and negligently and dashed Nitin Tiwari. The fact that Dinkar Joshi took Nitin Tiwari in his fiat car to the hospital and did not disclose to the doctor that Nitin Tiwari fell down from the scooter while driving the scooter also corroborates the case of the petitioner. The fact that Dinkar Joshi took Nitin Tiwari in his fiat car to the hospital and did not disclose to the doctor that Nitin Tiwari fell down from the scooter while driving the scooter also corroborates the case of the petitioner. We are of the view that the learned Tribunal on erroneous and flimsy grounds disbelieved the evidence adduced by the petitioner and finding of the Tribunal in this respect deserves to be set aside. We are of the view that the evidence lead by the petitioner is reliable and the evidence lead by the non-petitioner is not reliable. We hold that it is proved that on 15-1-2000, Dinkar Joshi by driving fiat car rashly and negligently dashed Nitin Tiwari who sustained injuries. The finding arrived at by the learned Tribunal in this respect is set aside. It is proved by the evidence of Nitin Tiwari, Dr. H.G. Kalyani, Dr. Ravindra Gangrade and Exhibits P-31, P-6, P-24, P-26 that Nitin Tiwari sustained grievous injuries in thoracic* 10th vertebra and he sustained permanent disability. At the time of accident, age of Nitin Tiwari was 21 years, he sustained grievous injuries and permanent disability. He was treated quite some time in Hoshangabad hospital, he suffered pain and mental agony, it is quite natural that he might have spent money on treatment, special diet and attendant though no medical bills have been proved by Nitin Tiwari but it cannot be hold that he has not spent money on treatment, special diet and attendant. Looking to the age of Nitin Tiwari, injuries sustained by him, permanent disability, pain and suffering, we deem it proper to award a lump sum compensation of Rs. 50,000/- to Nitin Tiwari in all heads along with interest @ 7% p.a from the date of filing of the claim petition before the Tribunal till realisation. ( 8. ) Consequently, MA No. 3201/04 filed by Dinkar Joshi is dismissed and MA No. 945/05 -filed by Nitin Tiwari is allowed, it is directed that appellant Nitin Tiwari is entitled to get-compensation amount of Rs. 50,000/- from Dinkar Joshi. The compensation amount shall carry interest @ 7% p.a from the date of filing of the claim petition before the Tribunal till realisation. The amount paid towards no fault liability shall be adjusted towards this compensation by Dinkar Joshi. No order as to costs. Order accordingly.