Hon'ble SHARMA, J.—This appeal has been filed against the award dated 16.11.2006 passed by Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal & Special Court (Communal Riots), Jaipur in Claim Case No. 814/2004 (465/1997) whereby an award of Rs. 19,32,480 was passed in favour of the claimant respondent No.1.

2. The facts have been set out in the impugned judgment and hence I am not repeating the same here except wherever necessary.

3. The brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that the claimant respondent No. 1 filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur under the provisions of Motor Vehicles Act on account of the alleged loss suffered by him due to injuries sustained in the road accident allegedly occurred on 31.3.1996 at about 4.00 p.m. when the claimant was traveling in jeep No. RJ 19 C 6510 with Rewat Singh, and when the said jeep crossed the Barwala Bye pass suddenly a TATA 704 Truck HR 46 8889 came from Jhansi side and hit the said jeep resulting injuries to the claimant and death of jeep driver. The said truck was being driven by respondent No. 2 rash and negligently. The said truck was owned by respondent No. 3 and was insured with the appellant insurance company. The said claim petition was lateron transferred to the Court of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Special (Communal Riots) Jaipur where it was registered as claim case No. 814/2004. The claimant in the claim petition claimed that at the time of accident he was 36 years old running his business in the name of M/s. Bhagwati Traders, Merta City and was earning Rs. 9000 per month and due to accident he sustained serious injuries and as such he claimed compensation. The permanent disability was assessed by the doctor 57.60%. The respondent 2 and 3 despite service did not appear before the Tribunal and as such order to proceed exparte was passed against them on 4.3.1998. The insurance company unfortunately could not file reply to the claim petition however the claim petition was contested by the insurer alone and as such the application under Section 170 filed by the insurance co. was allowed by the Tribunal on 26.9.2001 and the appellant insurance company was permitted to adopt all the defence available to insured. On behalf of the claimant 3 witnesses namely Tikam Chand as AW1, Mustak Pahalwan as AW 2 and Rewat Singh as AW 3 appeared before the Tribunal and produced documentary evidence marked as Ex. 1 to Ex. 766. The Tribunal vide award dated 16.11.2006 decided the claim petition awarding a sum of Rs. 19,32,480/- to the claimant respondent along with interest @ 6% per annum payable thereon from the date of filing claim petition till its actual payment.

4. Mr. Virendra Agarwal, learned counsel appearing for the insurance company has argued that the Tribunal while making assessment of compensation has committed serious error and the compensation has been assessed on very higher side looking to the nature of injury and material available on record. There was no evidence on record that due to alleged injuries the income of the deceased has been prejudiced or he is having difficulty in enjoyment of the life and even then the Tribunal has passed the award for Rs. 19,32,480 without considering the documentary evidence. The Tribunal has awarded the compensation in different heads though there was no evidence on record to substantiate the same and overall award passed for Rs. 19,32,480 in the case of permanent disability only 57.60% appears on the higher side. The disability certificate produced by the claimant cannot be taken into consideration because it was not proved by the doctor who has issued the same. The Tribunal has committed error in awarding interest from date of filing of claim petition because it can be awarded only from the date of passing of award.

5. On the contrary, Mr. Jitendra Mitruka, learned counsel appearing for the claimant respondent states that the award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper and there is no perversity in the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document