The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, including the involvement of the offending vehicle, victim's income, and grant of medical expenses, future prospects, and general damages.

JUDGMENT :

Bivas Pattanayak, J.

1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and award dated 27th June, 2018 passed by learned District Judge-cum-Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jalpaiguri in MAC Case No. 15 of 2014 granting compensation of Rs. 58,74,106/- in favour of the claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

2. The brief fact of the case is that on 28th September, 2013 at about 8:45 A.M. while the victim along with his friend Dhruba Narayan Mitra Das was proceeding towards Maynaguri side on a scooter bearing registration no. WB-72A/5325 for their official purpose, at that time the offending vehicle bearing registration no. WB-73B/2296 (truck) in a rash and negligent manner dashed the said scooter from behind. As a result of which, the victim and his friend sustained injuries. The friend of the victim was shifted to Sadar Hospital. The victim was directly taken to Dr. Chang’s Super Specialty Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Siliguri where he was hospitalised from 28th September, 2013 to 24th October, 2013. Since the condition of the victim deteriorated day by day, he was shifted to Neotia Health Care Nursing Home, Siliguri on 24th October, 2013 where he was hospitalised till 11th November, 2013. However, the victim ultimately succumbed to his injuries and died on 11th November, 2013. On account of sudden demise of the victim, the claimants being the widow, one major daughter and one minor daughter filed application for compensation of Rs. 60,00,000/- together with medical expenses under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

3. The claimants in order to establish their case examined five witnesses and produced documents which have been marked as Exhibits 1 to 18 respectively. During cross-examination of O.P.W.2, two documents were also exhibited on behalf of the claimants namely, medical bills and discharge summary as Exhibit 19-Series and 20 respectively.

4. The appellant-insurance company also adduced the evidence of two witnesses and produced documents which have been marked as Exhibits A to B respectively.

5. Respondent no.4-owner of the offending vehicle though entered appearance before the learned Tribunal and filed written statement, but ultimately did not contest the case and the same was disposed of ex parte against him. In the aforesaid backdrop, service of notice of appeal upon the said respondent stands dispensed with.

6. Upon considering the materials on record and the evidence adduced on behalf of the respective parties, the learned tribunal granted compensation of Rs. 58,74,106/- in favour of the claimants under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

7. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award of the learned Tribunal, the insurance company has preferred the present appeal.

8. Challenging the impugned judgment and award of the learned Tribunal, the claimants have also filed a cross objection being COT 53 of 2019.

9. Both the appeal and cross objection are taken up together for consideration and disposal.

10. Mr. Rajesh Singh, learned advocate for appellant-insurance company submitted as follows:

The learned Tribunal failed to appreciate that on the relevant date and time, the alleged offending vehicle bearing registration no. WB-73B/2296 (truck) was not involved in the accident. The inquest report prepared by the police authorities under Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code did not mention the involvement of the alleged vehicle bearing registration no. WB-73B/2296 (Truck) in the concerned accident and it has been noted that the accident had taken place by one unknown truck. The so called eyewitness to the occurrence was a tutored eyewitness for which reason no reliance can be placed on his testimony to decide the fact of involvement of the truck bearing registration no. WB-73B/2296 in the said accident. Further from the statement made before the investigating agency under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code by Sri Dhruba Narayan Mitra, who was rid