Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 102 (RAJ)

Virendra Singh v. Ramdhan

2012-01-09

MAHESH BHAGWATI

body2012
Hon'ble BHAGWATI, J.—Challenge in this appeal is to the order dated 17th April, 2006 whereby the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Behrod decreed an amount of Rs.48,500/- in favour of the appellant-claimant-Virendra Singh and against the respondents-non-claimants. 2. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and carefully perused the impugned judgment, it is noticed that on 18th January, 2004, at about 3.00 PM the appellant-claimant-Virendra Singh was coming and when he reached near Kheda Choudhary Hotel, one Jeep bearing registration No.RJ-06-C-7899 suddenly came and wrongly hit the claimant as a result of which he sustained grievous injuries on his person. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant canvassed that the appellant was a cleaner and his monthly income was Rs.3,000/- per month on the date of occurrence but the learned Tribunal is found to have considered the minimum wages i.e. Rs.73/- per day, permissible on that day. 4. Learned counsel further canvassed that the appellant not only sustained simple injuries but sustained fracture on his leg also as a result of which he was not able to perform his routine functions as usual. The learned Tribunal did not consider all these aspects while deciding the claim petition, hence, keeping in view the insufficient amount of compensation, the same should be enhanced and an appropriate award may be passed. 5. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, carefully perused the relevant material on record including the impugned award, it is found that the appellant has not produced any evidence so as prove Rs.3000/- to be the monthly income of the appellant, which he is found to have claimed in the claim petition. Since the appellant utterly failed to prove the said income so claimed by him, the learned Tribunal considered the minimum wages to be his income and reckoned the amount of compensation in accordance with the settled principles in this regard. The appellant is found to have sustained three simple injuries and one grievous injury and the learned Tribunal is found to have awarded Rs.3,000/- for thee simple injuries and Rs.5,000/- for one grievous injury. Keeping in view all the facts and circumstance in totality, the learned Tribunal is found to have rightly computed the amount of compensation and the total amount of Rs.48,500/- is found to be sufficient and apt in the facts and circumstances of the case. Keeping in view all the facts and circumstance in totality, the learned Tribunal is found to have rightly computed the amount of compensation and the total amount of Rs.48,500/- is found to be sufficient and apt in the facts and circumstances of the case. The impugned order award is just and suffers from no infirmity. In contra, the appeal is found to be devoid of any substance and the same deserves to be dismissed at the threshold. 6. For the reasons stated above, the appeal being devoid of any merit stands dismissed in limine.