SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(UK) 972419

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
SMT. MOHNI DEVI – Appellant
Versus
M/S. KASHIPUR AUTOMOBILES SERVICE – Respondent
AO 45 / 2012



##PAGE1##

2025:UHC:11647

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Appeal From Order No. 45 of 2012

29 December, 2025

Smt. Mohni Devi & others

--Appellants

Versus

M/s. Kashipur Automobiles Service & others

--Respondents

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Presence:-

Mr. Mohd. Azim, learned counsel for the appellants.

Mr. Bindesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the respondnents

(appeared through V.C.).

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

The present Appeal From Order has been

preferred by the appellant seeking enhancement of

compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal / District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, vide

judgment and award dated 29.03.2011 passed in Claim

Petition No. 366 of 2008, whereby the Tribunal partly

allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.

50,000/- as lump sum compensation, fastening the

liability upon the insurer. The appellant is aggrieved by

the said award on the ground that the Tribunal failed to

consider and assess the permanent disability suffered by

the claimant as a consequence of the accident, resulting

in gross inadequacy of compensation.

2. The brief facts of the case, as borne out from

the record, are that on 25.06.2008 at about 12:00

midnight, the claimant Devdatt Joshi was working as a

cleaner on tanker bearing registration No. UA-06C-2921,

which was carrying diesel and proceeding towards

Kashipur. When the vehicle reached near village

1

##PAGE2##

2025:UHC:11647

Udhawala on Afzalgarh–Jaspur road, Police Station

Afzalgarh, District Bijnor, a tractor-trolley came from the

opposite direction. In an attempt to save the tractor-

trolley, the tanker went out of control and collided with a

house. Due to the impact, the cleaner side window

opened, as a result of which the claimant fell down from

the tanker and his right hand was crushed under the

rear wheel of the tanker. Immediately after the accident,

the claimant was taken to the Primary Health Centre,

Kashipur. After initial treatment, he was referred to a

higher centre and admitted at Sai Hospital, Muradabad,

where during treatment his right hand had to be

amputated. It was pleaded that at the time of the

accident the claimant was about 52 years of age and was

earning Rs.3,300/- per month as a cleaner. Due to

amputation of his right hand, the claimant became

permanently and completely disabled, rendering him

incapable of performing any manual work, which

resulted in serious financial hardship and mental agony.

On these averments, the claimant filed a claim petition

under Sections 163-A/167 of the Motor Vehicles Act

seeking compensation of Rs.5,50,000/- along with

interest.

3. The appellants submitted that the victim (now

deceased) was employed as a cleaner on the said tanker

and was discharging his duties in the course of

employment when the accident occurred. The appellants

specifically pleaded that as a result of the accident, the

right hand of the victim was crushed under the rear

wheel of the tanker, necessitating amputation, thereby

rendering him permanently and completely disabled. It

was further pleaded that due to the said permanent

disability, the victim had lost his earning capacity and

2

##PAGE3##

2025:UHC:11647

became incapable of performing any manual or physical

work. They also submitted that the Tribunal failed to

appreciate the disability certificate certifying that the

victim has suffered a 80 % disability as a result of the

said accident as a result of which only a meager amount

Rs.50,000 was awarded to them. The appellants also

submitted that they had incurred substantial medical

expenses mental agony and loss of consortium. On these

premises, the appellants have sought enhancement of

compensation under Sections 173 of the Motor Vehicles

Act along with interest before this Court.

4. The owner of the tanker filed a written

statement admitting the occurrence of the accident but

denied negligence. It was pleaded that the accident

occurred while attempting to save the tractor-trolley

coming from the oppo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top