JUDGMENT : MA No. 353/2009 1. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jammu (in short “MACT, Jammu”) came to be approached by the respondent no. 1 Zahir Abbas with a claim petition on File no. 753/Claim on 04.02.2005 thereby seeking compensation on account of physical injury received him in a motor vehicle accident. 2. The respondent no. 1 came to meet an accident on 17.04.2004 near Forest Depot Narwal, Jammu. The accident causing vehicle was being driven by the respondent no. 2 –Maj. Sandeep Sharma, 15 Sector RR, Signal Company C/o 56 APO and the number of the offending vehicle being in reference was MP 09HB 7563. The scooter which met with an accident was being driven by the respondent no.1 - Zahir Abbas, who was grievously injured, along with pillion rider Mohd. Yousuf, taken to Govt. Medical College and Hospital, Jammu for immediate medical treatment and later on to be shifted for medical treatment in Amritsar at Karam Singh Memorial Orthopedic Research Centre whereat he came to suffer three operations and incurred medical expenses. 3. At the time of the said accident, the respondent no. 1 was twenty seven (27) years of age serving as SPO in the Police Department. The injury suffered by the respondent no. 1 was right leg fracture shaft of femur. For the treatment of the said injury a steel rod came to be placed in the fractured femur of his right leg. 4. On account of being a victim of the said motor vehicle accident leaving him injured and with physical disability of its kind, the respondent no. 1 claimed compensation through his claim petition in which he came to name the appellant-Oriental Insurance Company (“OIC” in short) along with offending driver-cum-owner Major. Sandeep Sharma as the respondents. The offending vehicle was insured by the appellant. 5. The MACT, Jammu came to frame the issues in the claim petition, with respect to the cause of accident, involvement of the offending vehicle bearing registration no. MP09HB 7563 in the accident, the driving licence status of the respondent no. 2 - Major. Sandeep Sharma and the compensation payable to the respondent no. 1. 6. The MACT, Jammu came to reach a finding that the claimant i.e. the respondent no.1-herein was a victim of the accident so caused by the offending vehicle on 17.04.2004 on account of rash and negligent driving on the part of the respondent no. 2 - Major. Sandeep Sharma and the compensation payable to the respondent no. 1. 6. The MACT, Jammu came to reach a finding that the claimant i.e. the respondent no.1-herein was a victim of the accident so caused by the offending vehicle on 17.04.2004 on account of rash and negligent driving on the part of the respondent no. 2- Major. Sandeep Sharma. 7. The MACT, Jammu vide its award dated 29.05.2009 came to hold the respondent no. 1 entitled to compensation of an amount of Rs. 2,04,600/- comprised of the following heads:- 1. For loss of future income Rs. 57,600/- 2. For pain and shock Rs. 50,000/- 3. For special diet expenses Rs. 5,000/- 4. For attendant charges Rs. 2,000/- 5. For medical expenses Rs. 90,000/- Total Rs. 2,04,600/- 8. It is against this award that the appellant –OIC has come to file an appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In its appeal, the appellant-OIC is meaning to plead that the award has been passed by totally ignoring the factual position and in a haste without appreciating the correct position of law as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, rendering the award as being an outcome of non-appreciation of factual position as well as law. 9. It is pleaded in the memo of appeal by the appellant-OIC that the MACT, Jammu did not appreciate the statement of the doctor in the correct perspective with respect to disability status of the respondent no. 1, inasmuch as, the MACT, Jammu came to overlook the medical record as well as statement of the concerned doctor for the purpose of computation of compensation. 10. As per the appellant-OIC, the physical disability of the respondent no. 1 as per the doctor’s assessment was 20% percent of right lower limb and not 20% of the body as assessed by the MACT, Jammu. The appellant-OIC is further meaning to find fault with the assessment of compensation under the head for loss of future income. It is in the light of these averments that the award of the MACT, Jammu is sought to be challenged on the sole purpose of getting the compensation reduced. 11. The very fact that the respondent no. The appellant-OIC is further meaning to find fault with the assessment of compensation under the head for loss of future income. It is in the light of these averments that the award of the MACT, Jammu is sought to be challenged on the sole purpose of getting the compensation reduced. 11. The very fact that the respondent no. 1 at the age of twenty seven (27) comes to suffer motor vehicle accident inflicted injury which warranted operation of bilateral fracture shaft of femur with fracture tibia (Rt) with crush injury (Rt), the medical treatment of which left him with pain and stiffness of (Rt) hip and (Rt) knee which as per the medical opinion of Dr. Rajesh Gupta examined in the case was of 20% of right lower limb and the disability being permanent in nature having the effects making it difficult for the respondent no. 1 in the matter of sitting, squatting and even running, as such, for the appellant-OIC to say that the person who suffered such like injury shall earn compensation at a lesser side amount is nothing but mocking the very concept of tort causing violence to human body. 12. The injury has left the respondent no. 1 in prime of his age to suffer for a remainder of his long life the effects of his said injury which with the passing of the time is going to compound the difficulties for the respondent no. 1 and it is that one bad moment of life that the respondent no. 1 is going to repent with respect the date and place at which he came to become the victim of the said accident. 13. Thus, the quantum of compensation assessed by the MACT, Jammu under the five heads, by no stretch of reasoning and reference, can be said to be excessive so as to get reduction just for the satisfaction of the appellant-OIC. In fact, this Court is of the opinion that the respondent no. 1 has been under compensated for pain and shock suffered by him on account of said resultant injury. 14. The appellant-OIC cannot be hold to say that a victim of a motor vehicle accident is supposed to preserve each and every memo/invoice with respect to the medicines prescribed and bought in connection with his medical treatment in a medical hospital, be it private or the govt. 14. The appellant-OIC cannot be hold to say that a victim of a motor vehicle accident is supposed to preserve each and every memo/invoice with respect to the medicines prescribed and bought in connection with his medical treatment in a medical hospital, be it private or the govt. The very fact that the respondent no. 1 got admitted in the Govt. Medical & Hospital, Jammu and then went for the sake of satisfaction for his medical treatment to Amritsar which is known for its orthopedic related medical services in private sector is itself a safe pointer to the fact that the medical expenses suffered and born out by the respondent no. 1 must have been incurred as calculated by the MACT, Jammu. 15. The appeal filed by the appellant-OIC is thus found to be meritless and is, therefore, dismissed without any costs. The amount if any, deposited by the appellant-OIC in connection with the filing of the appeal to challenge the impugned award be released in favour of the respondent no. 1 along with all accrued interest by the Registrar Judicial, Jammu within a period of one month from the date of passing of this judgement. Disposed of accordingly. MA No. 346/2009 16. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jammu (in short “MACT, Jammu”) came to be approached by the respondent no. 1 Mohd. Yousuf with a claim petition on File no. 752/Claim on 04.02.2005 thereby seeking compensation on account of physical injury received him in a motor vehicle accident. 17. The respondent no. 1 came to meet an accident on 17.04.2004 near Forest Depot Narwal, Jammu. The accident causing vehicle was driven by the respondent no. 2 –Maj. Sandeep Sharma, 15 Sector RR, Signal Company C/o 56 APO and the number of the offending vehicle being in reference was MP 09HB 7563. The scooter which met with an accident was being driven by Zahir Abbas and the respondent no. 1 was the pillion rider who was grievously injured taken to Govt. Medical College and Hospital, Jammu for immediate medical treatment and later on to be shifted for medical treatment in Amritsar at Karam Singh Memorial Orthopedic Research Centre whereat he came to suffer three operations and incurred medical expenses. 18. At the time of the said accident, the respondent no. 1 was twenty seven (27) years of age serving as Follower/Cook in the Police Department. 18. At the time of the said accident, the respondent no. 1 was twenty seven (27) years of age serving as Follower/Cook in the Police Department. The injury suffered by the respondent no. 1 was a bilateral fracture shaft of femur with fracture tibia (right) with crush injury right foot. For the treatment of the said inquiry an interlocking nails came to be placed in the femur of his right leg. 19. On account of being a victim of the said motor vehicle accident leaving him injured and with physical disability of its kind, the respondent no. 1 claimed compensation through his claim petition in which he came to name the appellant-Oriental Insurance Company (“OIC” in short) along with offending driver-cum-owner Major. Sandeep Sharma as the respondents. The offending vehicle was insured by the appellant. 20. The MACT, Jammu came to frame the issues in the claim petition, with respect to the cause of accident, involvement of the offending vehicle bearing registration no. MP09HB 7563 in the accident, the driving licence status of the respondent no. 2 - Major. Sandeep Sharma and the compensation payable to the respondent no. 1. 21. The MACT, Jammu came to reach a finding that the claimant i.e. the respondent no. 1 herein was a victim of the accident so caused by the offending vehicle on 17.04.2004 on account of rash and negligent driving on the part of the respondent no. 2-Major. Sandeep Sharma. 22. The MACT, Jammu, vide its award dated 29.05.2009 came to hold the respondent no. 1 entitled to compensation of an amount of Rs. 4,51,113/- comprised of the following heads:- 1. For loss of future income Rs. 2,91,840/- 2. For pain and shock Rs. 50,000/- 3. For special diet expenses Rs. 5,000/- 4. For attendant charges Rs. 2,000/- 5. For medical expenses Rs. 1,02,273/- Total Rs. 4,51,113/- 23. It is against this award that the appellant –OIC has come to file an appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. In its appeal, the appellant-OIC is meaning to plead that the award has been passed by totally ignoring the factual position and in a haste without appreciating the correct position of law as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, rendering the award as being an outcome of non-appreciation of factual position as well as law. 24. In its appeal, the appellant-OIC is meaning to plead that the award has been passed by totally ignoring the factual position and in a haste without appreciating the correct position of law as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, rendering the award as being an outcome of non-appreciation of factual position as well as law. 24. It is pleaded in the memo of appeal by the appellant-OIC that the MACT, Jammu did not appreciate the statement of the doctor in the correct perspective with respect to disability status of the respondent no. 1, inasmuch as, the MACT, Jammu came to overlook the medical record as well as statement of the concerned doctor for the purpose of computation of compensation. 25. As per the appellant-OIC, the physical disability of the respondent no. 1 as per the doctor’s assessment was 38% of both the lower limbs and not of the physical body as assessed by the MACT, Jammu. The appellant-OIC is further meaning to find fault with the assessment of compensation under the head for loss of future income. It is in the light of these averments that the award of the MACT, Jammu is sought to be challenged on the sole purpose of getting the compensation reduced. 26. The very fact that the respondent no. 1 at the age of twenty seven (27) comes to suffer motor vehicle accident inflicted injury which warranted operation of bilateral fracture shaft of femur and right tibia with interlocking nails, the medical treatment of which left him with stiffness of both hips, both knees and right ankle which as per the medical opinion of Dr. Rajesh Gupta examined in the case was of 38% of both the lower limbs and the disability being permanent in nature having the effects making it difficult for the respondent no. 1 in the matter of sitting, squatting and even running, as such, for the appellant-OIC to say that the person who suffered such like injury shall earn compensation at a lesser side amount is nothing but mocking the very concept of tort causing violence to human body. 27. The injury has left the respondent no. 1 in prime of his age to suffer for a remainder of his long life the effects of his said injury which with the passing of the time is going to compound the difficulties for the respondent no. 27. The injury has left the respondent no. 1 in prime of his age to suffer for a remainder of his long life the effects of his said injury which with the passing of the time is going to compound the difficulties for the respondent no. 1 and it is that one bad moment of life that the respondent no. 1 is going with respect to repent the date and place at which he came to become the victim of the said accident. 28. Thus, the quantum of compensation assessed by the MACT, Jammu under the five heads, by no stretch of reasoning and reference, can be said to be excessive so as to get reduction just for the satisfaction of the appellant-OIC. In fact, this Court is of the opinion that the respondent no. 1 has been under compensated for pain and shock suffered by him on account of said resultant injury. 29. The appellant-OIC cannot be hold to say that a victim of a motor vehicle accident is supposed to preserve each and every memo/invoice with respect to the medicines prescribed and bought in connection with his medical treatment in a medical hospital, be it private or the govt. The very fact that the respondent no. 1 got admitted in the Govt. Medical & Hospital, Jammu and then went for the sake of satisfaction for his medical treatment to Amritsar which is known for its orthopedic related medical services in private sector is itself a safe pointer to the fact that the medical expenses suffered and born out by the respondent no. 1 must have been incurred as calculated by the MACT, Jammu. 30. The appeal filed by the appellant-OIC is thus found to be meritless and is, therefore, dismissed without any costs. The amount if any, deposited by the appellant-OIC in connection with the filing of the appeal to challenge the impugned award be released in favour of the respondent no. 1 along with all accrued interest by the Registrar Judicial, Jammu within a period of one month from the date of passing of this judgement. Disposed of accordingly.