Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 2361 (RAJ)

Arjun Lal v. Narendra Singh

2009-11-13

G.S.SARRAF

body2009
Hon'ble SARRAF, J.—The claimant has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 7.9.2001 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shahpura, district Jaipur in motor accident claim no. 267/2001. 2. Briefly stated the facts are that on 30.10.1997 when the claimant was going by his camel-cart on National Highway no. 8 then a bus no. RJ 20 P 2255 driven rashly and negligently by the respondent no. 1 hit the camel-cart near the Dhani of Bhura Aheer within the jurisdiction of the police station Chandwaji in the district Jaipur in consequence of which the claimant suffered several injuries and the camel died and the cart was damaged. Learned Tribunal awarded Rs. 12,800/- for the seven simple injuries suffered by the claimant and Rs. 6,000/- for the death of the camel and damage to the cart and thus passed a total award of Rs. 18,800/- in favor of the claimant, Aggrieved, the claimant has filed this appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the claimant appellant has argued that the amount awarded for the injuries suffered by the claimant as well as amount awarded for damage to the property of the claimant is grossly inadequate and, therefore, it should be enhanced reasonably. 4. It is not necessary to discuss the evidence in detail as regards adequacy of the compensation amount on account of damage to the property because as per Section 147(2)(b) of the Motor Vehicles Act, a limit of Rs. 6,000/- has been fixed in respect of damage to any property of a third party. Learned Tribunal has awarded Rs. 6,000/- for the damage to the property of the claimant as such there is no scope for enhancement on this count. 5. As regards injuries the statement of the claimant Arjun (A.W. 1) is full of exaggerations and the fact remains that the claimant has suffered seven injuries and all the injuries are simple. Learned Tribunal has generously awarded Rs. 12,800/- for the seven simple injuries. There is no scope of any increase on this count also. 6. It is clear that there is no merit in this appeal. Consequently, the appeal stands dismissed.