Claimants suffering permanent disability in motor vehicle accidents are entitled to compensation for loss of future prospects, as established in relevant case law.

JUDGMENT :

Satyen Vaidya, J.

By way of instant appeal, a challenge has been laid to the award dated 04.12.2015, passed by learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (III), Mandi, District Mandi, H.P., in case No. MAC-80/2009, whereby respondent No.1 (hereafter referred to as claimant) has been held entitled to total compensation of Rs. 3,35,355/- alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of the filing of the petition till realization.

2. Respondent No. 1(claimant) filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “Act”) before learned Tribunal, seeking compensation on account of personal injuries and disablement suffered by her in a motor vehicle accident involving Tractor No. HP-31B-9315.

3. It was alleged by the claimant that on 03.01.2007, she was walking as a pedestrian on the road at village Kawal Kot, Tehsil Sadar, District Mandi, H.P. The Tractor bearing No. HP-31B-9315 came from behind and hit the petitioner. It was also averred that the tractor at the time of accident was being driven by driver Sh. Duni Chand in rash and negligent manner. As per petitioner not only she was injured in the accident but the tractor thereafter also rolled down in the fields causing death of the driver Sh. Duni Chand.

4. The Tractor was stated to be owned by respondent No. 2 herein (hereafter referred to as “owner”) and insured by the appellant herein (hereafter referred to as “insurer”).

5. As per claimant, she remained hospitalized from 03.01.2007 to 25.02.2007 in the first instance and thereafter from 08.03.2008 to 16.03.2008. She also claimed to have suffered permanent disability to the extent of 30%. Petitioner was stated to be 51 years of age at the time of accident. She further claimed to be earning Rs. 5,000/- per month from all sources including agricultural pursuits.

6. The owner filed his reply and admitted the factum of accident. However, allegations with respect to the rash and negligent driving of deceased Sh. Duni Chand were denied. It was submitted that the accident had taken place due to sudden mechanical defect.

7. The insurer also filed separate reply. It was alleged that the claimant was occupant of the Tractor and hence was a gratuitous passenger. Another objection was that the driver Sh. Duni Chand was not having valid and effective driving license. In this manner, the insurer sought to absolve itself from indemnifying the insured.

8. Learned Tribunal framed the following issues:-

1. Whether the petitioner sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident, which took place on 03.01.2007 at about 2:30 pm at place Kawal Kot due to rash and negligent driving of driver of Tractor No. H.P. 31B-9315, as alleged? OPP

2. If issue No. 1 is proved in affirmative, whether petitioners are entitled for grant of compensation, if so to what amount and from which of the respondents ?OPP

3. Whether the respondent No. 1 was not having valid documents of the tractor in question at the time of the alleged accident? OPR2

4. Whether the petitioner was an unauthorized and gratuitous passenger in the vehicle involved in the accident? OPR2.

5. Whether the driver of offending vehicle was not holding valid and effective driving license at the time of accident?OPR2

6. Relief.

Issues No. 1 and 2 were decided in affirmative and issues No. 3 to 5 were decided in negative. The claimant has been held entitled to compensation and interest, as noticed above.

9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record of the case.

10. Learned Senior Counsel for the insurer has contended that the award requires interferences as the same suffers from patent illegality and perversity. It has been submitted that the insurer was not liable to indemnify the insured as the claimant was clearly proved to be occupier of the tractor at the time of accident. He has made reference to the contents of FIR Ext. PW3/A. It has further been submitted that the finding of learned Tribunal with respect to earning of claimant at Rs.