IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, J.
Virendra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Vijay Kumar and others – Respondents
First Appeal From Order No. 78 of 2011
Decided On : 08-05-2020
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 173 – Compensation – Present appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed by appellant, being aggrieved by judgment and order passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court in Motor Accident Claim Petition awarding a sum of amount for expenses incurred towards medicines and treatment of injuries sustained by appellant in a motor accident, alongwith 6% interest from date of filing of claim petition till date of payment of compensation – Held, Appellant/claimant was a pillion rider aged 45 years, earning Rs.8000/- per month – His permanent disability is assessed at 50% and his services were dispensed with – His chances of getting any other employment was bleak and even if he got any job, the salary was likely to be a pittance – Court assessed his loss of future earning capacity as 50%. – It should be 9% in view decision of the Apex Court in Civil Appeal decided which is the latest in point of time – Appeal Allowed (Paras 29, 31, 32)
Facts of the Case:
Claimant aged 45 years filed MAC No.239 of 2008 against the driver & owner of the vehicle and the insurance company before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.7, Mathura claiming a compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- along with 12% interest in respect of the injuries suffered by him in the motor accident.
Finding of the Court:
Appellant/claimant was a pillion rider aged 45 years, earning Rs.8000/- per month – His permanent disability is assessed at 50% and his services were dispensed with – His chances of getting any other employment was bleak and even if he got any job, the salary was likely to be a pittance – Court assessed his loss of future earning capacity as 50%. – It should be 9% in view decision of the Apex Court in Civil Appeal decided which is the latest in point of time.
Result: Appeal Allowed
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Shri B.P. Verma, learned counsel for the claimant-appellant and Shri S.C. Srivastava, learned counsel for the insurance company.
2. The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has been filed by the appellant, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 21.9.2010 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court no.7, Mathura in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.239 of 2008 (Virendra Kumar vs. Vijay Kumar and others) awarding a sum of Rs.62,866/- for the expenses incurred towards medicines and treatment of the injuries sustained by the appellant in a motor accident, alongwith 6% interest from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of payment of compensation.
3. The claimant aged 45 years filed MAC No.239 of 2008 against the driver & owner of the vehicle and the insurance company before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Court No.7, Mathura claiming a compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- along with 12% interest in respect of the injuries suffered by him in the motor accident alleged to have occurred on 17.2.2008 around 12.30 p.m.
4. The claim petition was filed stating therein that on 17.2.2008 at about 12.30 PM the claimant was going alongwith his friend Goverdhan Singh on a motorcycle No.UP-85-R-5810 from Mathura to Farah when the driver of the Qualis Vehicle No.HR-70-7263 while driving the vehicle rashly and negligently hit the said motorcycle from behind on N.H.2 near village Mahuvan, damaging the motorcycle and causing serious injuries to the driver Goverdhan Singh as well as the pillion rider-claimant. Regarding the said accident the first information report was lodged at the concerned police station. The claimant-appellant was treated for injuries first at Lifeline Hospital, Mathura where he was under treatment from 17.2.2008 to 18.2.2008. Subsequently, when his condition was deteriorating, he was admitted to Loknayak Hospital, Delhi and he was admitted there from 19.4.2008 to 6.5.2008. During the treatment many operations were performed on his body and he was given 6 bottles blood. Due to the accident the claimant-appellant suffered serious physical and mental agony. On account of the injuries caused in the said accident the appellant suffered permanent physical disability. Before the accident the appellant was working as Guard at Toll Plaza near Mathura Mahuvan/Barari and getting salary of Rs.4,000/- per month. He also used to earn Rs.4000/- from agricultural activities at his village. In this manner, Rs.10,00,000/- was claimed along with 12% interest.
5. The opposite party no. 3-insurance company filed its written statement and contested the claim of the claimant on various grounds. Despite service of notices, neither the opposite party nos.1 and 2 (driver and owner of the offending vehicle) appear in the proceedings nor file any written statement. In such situation, the proceedings was conducted ex-parte against them vide order dated 28.7.2009. The driver of the motorcycle also held to be guilty of contributory negligence and as such, he also contributed to the accident to the extent of 20%. Finally, the Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.46,866 towards medical expenses; Rs.5000/- towards pain and suffering; Rs.3000/- towards conveyance; Rs.3000/- towards attendant charges and Rs.5000/- towards special diet. In this manner, the claimant-appellant was made entitled to receive a compensation of Rs.46,866 + 5000+ 3000 + 3000 + 5000, total compensation Rs.62,866/- alongwith 6% interest from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of payment.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant urged at the time of the hearing that the claimant-appellant claimed compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- for the injuries caused in the accident but the Claims Tribunal had awarded the compensation of Rs.62,866/- only towards medical expe
Ritu v. Regional Manager Uttranchal State Road Transport Corporation
Smt. Sarita Verma and ors vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another
Syed Sadiq and ors vs. Divisional Manager, United India Ins. Company
National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and ors.
R.D. Hattangadi v. Pest Control (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Common Cause, A Registered Society v. Union of India
Divisional Controller, KSRTC v. Mahadeva Shetty
Nizam's Institute of Medical Sciences v. Prasanth S. Dhananka
Arvind Kumar Mishra v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Senthil Kumar
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Veluchamy. 2005 (1) CTC 38
Arvind Kumar Mishra v. New India Assurance Company Ltd. (2010) 10 SCC 254
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.