Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 278 (RAJ)

Nena Ramn @ Nanu Ram v. Bachchan Singh

2012-02-03

MAHESH BHAGWATI

body2012
BHAGWATI, J.—Since two afore-stated appeals and cross objections filed by the National Insurance arise out of and pertaining to one judgment and award dated 16th November, 2004 rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ajmer, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. Civil Misc. Appeal No.5305/2008 2. The appellant-Nena Ram @ Nanu Ram and others have preferred this appeal against the award dated 16.11.2004 being dis-satisfied with the quantum of award and implored to enhance the same. 3. Adumbrated in brief the facts of the case are that on 11th September, 2001 at about 1.00PM (During night hours) an accident took place when the driver Bachchan Singh of truck bearing registration No.HR 38-C-4847 drove the truck rashly and negligently at a fast speed and caused an accident with the truck moving in front of him when he endeavoured in order to over-take the said truck bearing registration No.RJ-G-6438. It is alleged that on account of rash and negligent driving of Bachchan Singh, the truck entered forcibly into the said truck No.RJ-14G-6438, resulting into simple and grievous injuries to Nena Ram and the death of Bahadur Singh. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the relevant material on record. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant canvassed that the Tribunal considered all the aspects but lost sight of loss of future income on account of 9% permanent disability, which the appellant sustained during accident. The injured Nena Ram sustained five fractures on his legs and four simple injuries. He remained in Hospital for 24 days where he was operated by the Doctor and incurred expenses approximately Rs.1,00,000/- on his treatment, albeit, he filed the medical vouchers of Rs.6,290/- only, but there were many other expenses too, of which the bills could not be furnished before the Tribunal. The Tribunal having considered the number of injuries, awarded Rs.4,000/- for four simple injuries, Rs.25,000/- for five fractures, but under the head of suffering, pain and trauma as also the percentage of permanent disability awarded only Rs. 55,000/- which is in the facts and circumstances of the case, is abysmally low and needs to be enhanced. 6. Learned counsel for the National Insurance Co. 55,000/- which is in the facts and circumstances of the case, is abysmally low and needs to be enhanced. 6. Learned counsel for the National Insurance Co. in contra, opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and contended that the accident took place way back in the year 2001 and the award was passed in 2004. The Tribunal considered all the aspects and reasonably awarded an amount of Rs.92,290/- in favour of the claimant which cannot be said to be abysmally low amount and the said award needs no modification. 7. Having reflected over the submissions made at the bar and carefully scanned the impugned award, it is revealed that the Tribunal awarded a meagre amount of Rs.4,000/- for physical pain, suffering, trauma and 9% permanent disability. if we take into consideration the income of the injured, his age and the number of fractures sustained by him as also the permanent disability the amount from mathematical calculation, comes to near about Rs.55,000/-, hence, I feel inclined to enhance the amount of compensation by Rs.30,000/- more. Thus, the claimant Nena Ram is held entitled to claim Rs.1,22,290 from the non-claimants respondent No.1 to 3, jointly and severally. The other terms and conditions under the award shall remain unchanged. 8. In view of above, the award dated 16th November, 2004 in respect of Nena Ram stands modified as indicated hereinabove. 9. The appeal of Nena Ram thus stands disposed of accordingly. Civil Misc. Appeal No.624/200 & Cross objection No.23/2005 10. Learned counsel for the appellant canvassed that in case of Mohan Singh and ors., the Tribunal considered all the aspects but lost sight of the fact that deceased was earning Rs.4,000/- per month and there being five dependents, the Tribunal should have been deducted 1/5th of income towards his personal expenses had been alive in view of the various judgments of Apex Court as well as of this Court, but the learned Tribunal deducted only 1/3rd of the personal expenses of the deceased. The impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal is, thus, abysmally low which needs to be enhanced. 11. The National Insurance Co. has filed cross objections on the ground that the Tribunal did not deal with the question of composite negligence and thus, the award passed in the case of claimants- Mohan Singh and ors. deserve to be modified. The impugned award passed by the learned Tribunal is, thus, abysmally low which needs to be enhanced. 11. The National Insurance Co. has filed cross objections on the ground that the Tribunal did not deal with the question of composite negligence and thus, the award passed in the case of claimants- Mohan Singh and ors. deserve to be modified. Learned counsel for the National Insurance Co. opposed the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellants and contended that the accident took place way back in the year 2001 and the award was passed in 2004. The Tribunal considered all the aspects and reasonably awarded an amount of Rs.4,78,000/- in favour of the claimant which cannot be said to be abysmally low amount and the said award needs no modification. 12. Having reflected over the submissions made at the bar and carefully scanned the impugned award, it is revealed that the depen-dents of the deceased are five in number and the learned Tribunal deducted only 1/3rd towards personal expenses of the deceased, whereas as per the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Smt. Sarla Verma & Ors. vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., the deduction should have been 1/5th, hence, I feel inclined to enhance the amount of compensation by Rs.11,600/- more. Thus, the claimants Mohan Singh and ors. are held entitled to claim Rs.4,89,600/- from the non-claimants respondent No.1 to 3 jointly and severally. The other terms and conditions under the award shall remain unchanged. 13. In view of above, the award dated 16.11.2004 in respect of Mohan Singh and ors. stands modified as indicated hereinabove. 14. The appeal of Mohan Singh and ors. thus, stands disposed of accordingly.