Point of law: the respondent-Insurance Company cannot be fastened with the liability to pay the entire compensation. The deceased persons were travelling in a tractor trolley which is not passengers carrying vehicle and, therefore, learned Tribunal has committed an error while awarding compensation to the claimants.

JUDGMENT :

(1) S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1122/2018

(2) S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 839/2018

(3) S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 846/2018

(4) S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 847/2018

(5) S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1111/2018

(6) S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1113/2018

(7) S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1118/2018

(8) S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1121/2018

(9) S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1124/2018

1. These appeals are preferred against the judgment and award dated 09/08/2017 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhilwara in claim case Nos.230/2014, 228/2014, 229/2014, 227/2014, 234/2014, 231/2014, 235/2014, 236/2014 & 232/2014 on behalf of the appellants/claimants who suffered various injuries on account of the accident occurred on 12/09/2013.

2. The Tribunal, after framing the issues, evaluating the evidence on record and hearing counsel for the parties, decided the claim petitions of the appellants/claimants.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants sustained simple injuries for which the Tribunal awarded a meagre sum as such the same is required to be enhanced by this Court. He submits that on account of the injuries suffered by the appellants, the expenses were incurred by the appellants for the treatment, they suffered pain and agony, and for some time, some of the appellants could not be able to perform their day to day functions. He, therefore, submits that a reasonable amount may be enhanced in their cases.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents, while opposing the arguments, have submitted that since the injuries suffered by the appellants are simple in nature, the Tribunal rightly awarded the amount of compensation in the present cases as the amount awarded by the Tribunal can very conveniently be treated as ‘just compensation’ in the present case.

6. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and gone through the judgment dated 09/08/2017 passed by the Tribunal as well as the records of the case including the injury reports of the appellants.

7. The injury reports of the appellants show that all the appellants suffered simple injuries and as per the injury reports, it can be reasonably inferred that though after primary treatment the appellants were discharged, the fact of pain and suffering cannot be ruled out.

8. Without going into the merits of the cases on overall consideration of facts, this Court is of the view that if an amount of Rs. 5,000 (Rupees : Five Thousand Only) in addition to the amount already awarded by the Tribunal is awarded to the appellants/claimants, the same will meet the ends of justice. Thus, this Court is of the opinion that the appeals preferred by the appellants are partly allowed. The respondent/Insurance Company is directed to pay an amount of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees : Five Thousand Only) to each of the appellants/claimants as full and final settlement towards the compensation in addition to the amount awarded by the Tribunal vide its judgment dated 09/08/2017 within a period of six weeks from today. If the said amount is not paid within the stipulated time, the same will carry an interest @ 6% per annum till the same is paid.

(10) S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 836/2018 :

9. Learned counsel for the appellant fairly submits that the amount awarded in the present case is not liable to be enhanced in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pranay Sethi reported in (2017) SC 5157 as the deceased was 70 years old and, therefore, no amount towards the loss of future prospects is liable to be awarded in this case.

10. I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and gone through the judgment dated 09/08/2017 passed by the Tribunal as well as the record of the case. I am of the considered view that the amount awarded by the Tribunal in the present case is just and proper and does not req