Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1160 (RAJ)

Ramesh Kumar S/o Shri Manaramji v. Shaitan Ram S/o Avburamji @ Shravanji

2017-05-05

GOVERDHAN BARDHAR

body2017
JUDGMENT : Goverdhan Bardhar, J. 1. The instant civil misc. appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 has been preferred by the claimant/appellant for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sirohi (for short 'the Tribunal') vide impugned judgment and award dated 09.01.2004 passed in Claim Case No. 72/2003, whereby compensation in the sum of Rs.52,000/- has been awarded in favour of the claimant/appellant. 2. Succinctly stated, the facts of the case are that on 23.10.2002 the claimant/appellant was going to Kalyan from Balrai via Sumerpur by Bus No. RJ-24-P-1427 of RSRTC. Near Krishna Restaurant, a Truck bearing No. RJ-19 G-2814 being driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner, hit the aforesaid bus from front side, as a result of which, the claimant sustained several grievous and simple injury. In the claim petition, it was stated that on account of rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle accident took place. 3. No reply was filed on behalf of the respondent No.1 & 2. Respondent No.3-Insurance Company filed its reply denying the contents of the claim petition and admitting that the offending vehicle was insured with it from 18.01.2002 up to 17.01.2003. At the time of accident, the driver of the offending vehicle was not having the valid licence. 4. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed seven issues including the issue of relief. The claimant got examined himself as AW-1 and got exhibited certain documents. No evidence was produced on behalf of the respondents. 5. The learned Tribunal after hearing both the parties and taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstances of the case, vide its judgment and award dated 09.01.2004 awarded a compensation of Rs.52,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6 per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization in favour of the claimant/appellant. Hence, this misc. appeal for enhancement of compensation. 6. Counsel for the claimant/appellant has submitted that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced as claimed in the claim petition. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident, the claimant-appellant became 20% partial permanent disablement in his right hand consequent to which he is unable to work properly. 6. Counsel for the claimant/appellant has submitted that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced as claimed in the claim petition. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident, the claimant-appellant became 20% partial permanent disablement in his right hand consequent to which he is unable to work properly. The appellant/claimant spent a huge amount for his treatment and his treatment is continuing since long and he remained hospitalized at Ahemdabad for more than 1 ½ months. Hence, the impugned judgment and award deserves to be modified. 7. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company has opposed the submissions advanced by the counsel for the claimant/appellant and submitted that the award passed by the learned Tribunal is just and proper and warrants no interference. 8. I have considered the submissions on behalf of the counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment/award as also material available. 9. The claimant/appellant in his evidence adduced that after accident, he was admitted at Sirohi Hospital and advised for x-ray. Thereafter, he was taken to Civil Hospital at Ahemdabad by a private taxi where his right hand was got operated and remained admitted for about 8 to 9 months and on 05.10.2002 he was discharged from hospital. He expended about fifty to sixty thousand in his treatment. He went to Ahmedabad for treatment about four to five time by private taxi, for which he incurred about 15 to 20 thousand. His monthly income was Rs.4,000/- by working at a journal store and because of the said accident, he lost his job. In support of his evidence, he produced his salary certificate (Ex-115), Taxi fare bill (Ex-114) and prescription slips and medical bills (Ex-16 to 112). In his cross-examination, the claimant/appellant conceded that he underwent treatment only in Government hospital and no expenditure was incurred in his treatment. He denied the facts that taxi fare bill was forged and he was not working at a journal store. The learned Tribunal held that the taxi fare bill and salary certificate cannot be said to be forged or fabricated. Non-claimants produced no evidence in relation to the aforesaid documents being forged or fabricated. The accident was occurred at Sirohi. The claimant/appellant underwent treatment at Sirohi and Ahmedabad which was evident from the prescription slips of doctors and medical bills. The learned Tribunal held that the taxi fare bill and salary certificate cannot be said to be forged or fabricated. Non-claimants produced no evidence in relation to the aforesaid documents being forged or fabricated. The accident was occurred at Sirohi. The claimant/appellant underwent treatment at Sirohi and Ahmedabad which was evident from the prescription slips of doctors and medical bills. In the accident, his right hand was got fractured and for which he was operated. It cannot be said that due to the permanent disablement, the claimant/appellant lost his job as no evidence was produced by the claimant/appellant in this regard. The claimant/appellant suffered 20% permanent disability in his right hand consequent to which he is unable to work properly and further due to the said accident, he was to suffer for a long time. 10. The learned Tribunal after taking into consideration the entire facts and circumstance of the case, awarded Rs.10,000/- for expenses of treatment, Rs.7,000/- for pain and mental agony, Rs.30,000/- for future prospectus, Rs.2,000/- for transportation expenses and Rs.3,000/- for loss of income. In all, compensation of Rs.52,000/- was awarded to the claimant/appellant. 11. However, looking to the age of the claimant/appellant, nature of the injuries sustained by the claimant and the fact that due to the injuries, the claimant/appellant was to suffer for long time, in the opinion of this Court, the claimant/appellant is entitled to get an additional compensation of Rs.50,000/-. Hence, in addition to the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, Rs.50,000/- deserves to be enhanced with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization. Therefore, the impugned award needs to be modified and enhanced to the above extent. 12. In the result, this misc. appeal is partly allowed and the impugned judgment/award dated 09.01.2004 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sirohi in Claim Case No.72/2003 stands modified to the above extent. The appellant/claimant shall be entitled to get a sum of Rs.50,000/- in addition to compensation amount already awarded by the learned Tribunal along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.