Order

02/08/2021 The present civil misc. appeal has been filed by the appellant-non claimant challenging the award dated 09.03.2021 passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal No.1, Kotputli, District Jaipur (in short ‘MACT’) in Claim Case No.409/2014 whereby the claim petition filed by the respondents-claimant has been allowed and an award of Rs.39,43,703/- has been passed in favour of the claimant along with interest @ 7% from the date of filing of claim petition dated 15.04.2014.

Learned counsel submitted that the Court below has committed serious error in allowing the claim petition of the injured claimant.

Learned counsel submitted that the evidence which was led by the injured-claimant did not make out a case that any injury was caused due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the Corporation.

Learned counsel further submitted that the amount of compensation as given by the MACT, is also not based on correct principle of law.

Learned counsel further submitted that the exaggerated claim made by the injured, has been allowed in-toto.

Learned counsel submitted that proper evidence was not produced before the Court below to get the amount of compensation and in an injury case, the Court below has granted compensation of Rs.39,43,703/- along with interest @ 7%.

Learned counsel further submitted that for different heads under which compensation was claimed, the injured- claimant had not placed on record the evidence to the same effect and only on the basis of sympathy with the injured claimant, the amount in question has been awarded.

This Court on reading of the award finds that the injured-claimant has suffered 100% physical disability.

This Court further finds that the injured has lost eye-

sight of his both eyes and he is said to be living a life without any normal functions, which can be done by a human being. This Court further finds that the Court below has kept in mind the evidence which was led by the injured-claimant in respect of the medical bills and the treatment which he had undergone after suffering the injury due to the accident, caused by the driver of the Corporation.

This Court finds that the Court below has recorded its finding in respect of negligence of the driver of the bus and it has rightly come to the conclusion that the injured-claimant was hit by the bus and injured was waiting on the side road and the bus in question driven by driver in rash and negligent manner, had hit the injured who was waiting on the road side.

This Court finds that the negligence of the injured has not been found and it is the driver of the vehicle who was rash and negligent in driving the vehicle and caused injury to the injured.

The issue with regard to grant of higher compensation to the injured, this Court finds that the entire evidence has been kept in mind while awarding the amount of compensation.

This is an admitted case that injured has suffered

100% disability and he has lost eye-sight of both the eyes.

This Court finds that, recently, the Apex Court in the case of Kajal Vs. Jagdish Chand & Ors. reported in [AIR 2020 Supreme Court 776] has interpreted “just compensation” and multiplier which is required to be applied in a case where person looses the ability to lead a normal life in future and suffers 100 %

Physical Disability.

This Court finds that the Court below has correctly decided the claim petition as per law.

Accordingly, this Court finds that no error has been committed in passing the award and the present civil misc. appeal stands dismissed.

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J Himanshu Soni/Parul/8

Powerd by TCPDF (w.tcpdf.org)