Back
2020 Supreme(J&K) 427
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
Sanjeev Kumar, J.
National Insurance Co. Ltd.
Versus
Abhijeet Khajuria and others
MA No. 573/2010
Decided on 23-06-2020
Subject
Motor Vehicle Accident - Compensation
Act Referred
Headnote
Motor Vehicles Act 1988 - Section 166 - Motor Accidents Claim - Claim petition - Motor Cycle bearing registration was hit by Matador bearing hereinafter offending vehicle for short which was being driven by respondent in a rash and negligent manner- Claimant sustained multiple injuries all over his body and was immediately shifted to Government Medical College Hospital Jammu- He remained under treatment in GMC Hospital for some time and thereafter was shifted to Hospital Amritsar where he remained under treatment days and his leg was operated upon- Having been injured in accident on account of rash and negligent driving of respondent and having suffered mental as well as monitory loss claimant filed claim petition Section Motor Vehicles Act before Tribunal claiming compensation for loss sustained due to accident- claim petition was contested only by Insurer whereas driver and owner of offending vehicle were proceeded ex-parte –Held, claimant was carrying two pillion riders on his Motor Cycle as such was acting in violation of provisions of Motor Vehicles Act and rules framed therefore Tribunal should have presumed contributory negligence on part of claimant is devoid of any merit- Simply because a person is driving his vehicle in violation of Motor Vehicles rules framed re does not give license to or vehicle on road to kill or injure driver or a pillion rider of such vehicle- Insurer has not by any evidence demonstrated that claimant was in any manner contributory to accident that was caused due to rash and negligent driving of offending vehicle quantum of compensation is concerned learned counsel for Insurer fairly conceded that compensation on first three heads has been granted by Tribunal fairly but joins issue insofar as compensation account of medical expenses is concerned- plea of Insurer is that in absence of any evidence to prove medical bills Tribunal should not have accepted bill amount as a gospel truth and awarded sum impressed by argument either - Insurer in its objections has not denied bills nor does it deny that claimant had suffered multiple injuries all over his body in accident and had remained admitted both GMC Hospital Jammu and Hospital Amritsar for almost a month- Given nature of injuries and disablement suffered and in light of evidence on record it is most reasonable to award a sum on account of medical expenses- Court find no illegality or infirmity in awarding of aforesaid sum in favour of claimant - Appeal dismissed
For the Petitioner:Mr. Baldev Singh, Advocate.
For the Respondent: None.
JUDGMENT
National Insurance Company Limited ( hereinafter for short „the Insurer ) is in appeal against the award dated 31.05.2010 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jammu (hereinafter “the Tribunal” for short) passed in Claim Petition No. 543/claim titled Abhijeet Khajuria vs. Onkar Sharma and others, whereby the Tribunal has held Abhijeet Khajuria ( for short „the claimant hereafter), entitled to a sum of ¹ 4,15,600/- by way of compensation along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum as compensation to be paid by the Insurer.
2. Before proceeding to consider the grounds of challenge urged in this appeal, it would be worthwhile to give few background facts.
3. On 16.09.2006 at about 7 a.m, the claimant while driving his Motor Cycle bearing registration No. JK02T-4791, was hit by Matador bearing No. JK02S-9331 ( hereinafter „the offending vehicle for short) which was being driven by respondent No.2 in a rash and negligent manner. The claimant sustained multiple injuries all over his body and was immediately shifted to Government Medical College Hospital, Jammu. He remained under treatment in GMC Hospital for some time and thereafter was shifted to Hardas Hospital, Amritsar where he remained under treatment for 20/25 days and his leg was operated upon. Having been injured in the accident on account of rash and negligent driving of respondent No.2 and having suffered mental as well as monitory loss, the claimant filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle3s Act, 1988 before the Tribunal, claiming compensation for the loss sustained due to the accident. The claim petition was contested only by the Insurer whereas the driver and the owner of the offending vehicle were proceeded ex-parte.
4. On the basis of the pleadings of the contesting parties, the Tribunal framed the following issues:-
1. Whether an accident occurred on 16.09.2006 at Ambphalla due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle No. JK02S 9331 in the hands of its driver in which petitioner Abhijeet Khajuria sustained grievous injuries.? OPP
2. If issue No.1 is proved in affirmative whether petitioner is entitled to the compensation, if so, to what extent and from whom? OPP
3. Whether at the time of accident driver of offending vehicle was not holding valid and effective driving license and drove the vehicle in violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy, and route permit etc.? OPR-3
4. Relief.
5. With a view to discharge the burden of proof of issue Nos. 1, 2 and 4, the claimant, besides entering into the witness box himself, also examined two witnesses, namely, Prem Kuar and Vinay Dhar. The Insurer chose not to lead any evidence in rebuttal nor it produced any evidence to discharge the onus of proving issue No.3.
6. On the conspectus of evidence on record, the Tribunal found all the issues i.e. issue Nos. 1,2 and 4 proved in favour of the claimant and issue No. 3 proved against the Insurer. Taking note of the permanent disablement suffered by the claimant and the medical expenses incurred, the Tribunal awarded sum of Rs. 4,15,600/- in favour of the claimant with the following break-up:
| 1. | For loss of future income | Rs. 75,600/- |
| 2. | For pain and sufferings | Rs. 75,000/- |
| 3. | For loss of amenities of life | Rs. 75,000/- |
| 4. | For medical expenses | Rs. 1,90,000/- |
7. The amount of compensation was directed to be paid along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its liquidation, except on future loss of income. Since the offending vehicle was insured with the Insurer, as such, the Insurer was directed to indemnify the owner by satisfying the award.
8. The impugned award is assailed by the Insurer, inter alia, on the following grounds:-
a. That the Tribunal has failed to appreciate that the claimant was driving the Motor Cycle with tw
