Back
2025 Supreme(Gau) 1121
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
M/S United India Insurance Co. Ltd - Appellant
Versus
Sri Thanerwar Baruah And 3 Ors - Respondent
MACApp. 413 of 2018
Decided On : 19-05-2025
For the Appellant :Mr. M. Dutta, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. T. Chakraborty, Advocate
The court upheld a compensation amount of Rs.25,91,271 for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident, deeming it just and fair based on ongoing medical needs and suffering.
Headnote:(A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 - Sections 168 and 173 - Appeal against award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal - Appellant challenges the adequacy of compensation citing lack of reasonable basis for the award. (Para 3)
(B) Compensation quantum - Court finds the awarded compensation of Rs.25,91,271/- reasonable given the injuries sustained and the ongoing medical needs. (Para 12)
Facts of the case:
On 24.08.2004, the claimants' daughter was injured in a truck accident while in a rickshaw, leading to extensive medical treatment. The claim for Rs.19,78,797/- was made, but initially dismissed; later reinstated with evidence of ongoing suffering. (Paras 5, 8, 9)
Findings of Court:
The compensation awarded considers the serious long-term injuries and necessary future treatments. (Paras 12, 16)
Issues: Whether the Tribunal's compensation amount was justified considering the severity of injuries and ongoing medical needs. (Para 11)
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held the compensation amount was just and fair, affirming the Tribunal's decision given the ongoing suffering and medical expenses. (Paras 10, 16)
Result: Appeal dismissed, compensation of Rs.25,91,271/- upheld.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of the appeal and its basis under the motor vehicles act (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. challenge to compensation amount's fairness (Para 3 , 14) |
| 3. details of the accident and the victim's injuries (Para 4) |
| 4. details of accident and claimant's injuries (Para 5 , 6 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. compensation assessment based on suffering (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 6. final order on compensation and interest awarding (Para 15) |
| 7. final decision on compensation and interest (Para 16) |
JUDGMENT :
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Heard Mr. M. Dutta, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. T. Chakraborty, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.
2. This is an appeal filed under Section 173 of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988 (for short ‘the Act of 1988’) challenging the judgment and award dated 05.01.2018 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tinsukia (for short ‘the learned Tribunal’) in MACT Case No.107/2006.
3. The grounds of objection taken in the instant appeal primarily is that the learned Tribunal had made an award in favour of the claimants which is not based upon the evidence. Mr. M. Dutta, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that in terms with Section 168 of the Act of 1988, what a claimant would be entitled to should be the just and fair compensation but not a compensation which has no reasonable basis. The learned counsel therefore submitted that this is a case where the learned Tribunal had awarded an amount which is whether fair or reasonable for which interference is required.
4. Taking into account the said grounds of objection which pertains to the quantum arrived at by the learned Tribunal, this Court finds it relevant to take note of the facts which led to the filing of the instant appeal.
5. On 24.08.2004 at around 11:30 A.M., the daughter of the claimants namely Smti Sikha Moni Baruah was proceeding in a rickshaw with her friend Smti Banti Suner. Suddenly, one truck bearing Registration No. AS-E-6981 driven in a rash and negligent manner knocked down the rickshaw on the A.T. Road near Sweet India Hotel which resulted in inflicting severe injuries on the face and other body parts of the daughter of the claimants. Immediately, the daughter of the claimants was admitted to the Civil Hospital, Tinsukia but due to seriousness, she was shifted to Aditya Nursing Home, Dibrugarh. Thereupon, she was referred to Sir Gangaram Hospital, Delhi where she received her treatment. Immediately, after the accident, a case was also registered being Tinsukia P.S. Case No.355/04 under Sections 279 /338 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE against the driver of the offending vehicle.
6. It is pertinent herein to mention that at that relevant point of time when the accident happened, the daughter of the claimants was a student pursuing her Bachelor in Arts. The claimants sought for a compensation of Rs.19,78,797/-. Pursuant thereto, the appellant herein who was the opposite party No.3 in the claim proceedings filed its written statement wherein general defences were taken. It was also stated that the claim was without any basis and excessive and as such, liable to be dismissed. The owner of the offending truck also filed a written statement wherein he had denied the claims on the ground of being vague, incomplete and did not contain all material particulars. At the time when the accident had taken place, the truck in question was insured with the appellant Insurance Company which was valid from 22.01.2004 to 21.01.2005.
7. On the basis of the pleadings, the learned Tribunal framed three issues which are reproduced herein under:
“(i) Whether a motor vehicle accident took place on 24.08.04 involving vehicle No.AS-E-6981 (Truck)?
(ii) Whether the injured (claimants’ daughter) sustained injuries in the accident? If so, to what extent?
(iii) Is the claimant entitled to compensation?
If so, to what extent and from whom?”
8. Pursuant to the issues being framed, evidence was adduced. The learned Tribun
