BENCH AT JAIPUR v. District Tonk

Order

1. The present appeal has been filed by the claimant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred to as "the Act of 1988") for enhancement of compensation assailing the award dated 25.08.2007 passed by the Additional District Judge, Fast Track No.2, Tonk (Motor Accident Claims Tribunal), Tonk (hereinafter to be referred to as the "learned Tribunal") in Claim Case No.99/2007 (374/07) (353/05), whereby the claim petition filed by the claimant-appellant has been partly allowed and awarded compensation of Rs.94,056/-.

2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that on

26.08.2004, the claimant while returning to his house after dropping his uncle at Bus Stand on his motorcycle, near Dhanna Talai one Truck bearing No.RJ-26-G-0575, coming from opposite direction being driven by respondent No.1 the driver of the said [2025:RJ-JP:27313] (2 of 5) [CMA-390/2008] vehicle(respondent No.1) in a rash and negligent manner and collided with the motorcycle of claimant/appellant. As a result of the accident, the claimant/appellant sustained grievous injuries.

3. Consequently, the claim petition filed by the claimant stating that at the time of the accident, age of the claimant was 31 years and he was earning Rs.3,000/- per month by doing a private job. It was further submitted that in the accident, the appellant sustained permanent disabilities, therefore, the claimant filed the claim petition seeking just and proper compensation.

4. Notice of the claim petition was issued to non-claimants/respondents No.1 and 2, despite service of the notice, they did not appear before the Tribunal, thereafter, ex- parte proceedings were drawn against them on 30.11.2005.

5. Notice of the claim petition was issued to the non-claimants/respondent No.3-Insurance Company, wherein the Insurance Company filed a detailed reply to the claim petition, wherein they have denied the averments made in the claim petition and submitted that the owner and the Insurance Company of the motor cycle in question are also necessary party and further stated that report of the accident was filed under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. after a delay of ten (10) months, accordingly, the claim petition filed by the claimants may be dismissed.

6. On the basis of pleading of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed seven issues.

7. In order to substantiate the plea and averments of the claim, the claimant examined himself as AW-1, AW-2 Surajmal and AW-3 Mohd. Mumtaj and produced documents Ex.1 to Ex.94. [2025:RJ-JP:27313] (3 of 5) [CMA-390/2008]

8. The non-claimant/respondents, despite granting opportunity, chose not to led any evidence.

9. After hearing arguments of both the respective parties, the learned Tribunal has decided all issues in favour of the claimants and awarded a sum of Rs.94,056/- along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition.

10. Being aggrieved of which, the claimant/appellant has preferred the present appeal.

11. Learned counsel for the claimant/appellant submits the learned Tribunal has considered that the claimant/appellant has sustained several injuries, but the learned Tribunal has awarded a meager sum of Rs.94,056/- which is inadequate and the learned Tribunal has not considered the future prospectus of the injured, therefore, he prays that the impugned award may be modified and compensation may be enhanced to some extent.

12. Per contra, learned counsel non-claimant/respondent-Insurance Company vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the claimant/appellant and he submits that the impugned order is just and proper and does not call for any interference by this Court and the appeal filed by the appellant may be dismissed.

13. Heard and considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

14. From the record of the case, it is revealed that the claimant/appellant has sustained grievous injuries in the accident and at the time of accident, the age of the injured was 31 years [2025:RJ-JP:27313] (4 of 5) [CMA-390/2008] and in the accident as evident from Ex.20, the appellant sustained permanent disability to the extent of 10%.

15. From the record of the case it is evident that the learned Tribunal has not considered the future prospects of the injured and awarded a meagre sum under the heads of 'pain and suffering' and 'food and nutrition', because admittedly the appellant remained in hospitalized from 27.08.2004 to 06.09.2004 (Ex.-4) and it is also revealed from the record that due to the accident, the appellant sustained head injuries, due to which till date, the appellant is facing little hardships.

16. Looking to the injuries sustained by the claimant/appellant, this Court is of the opinion that the amount awarded is require to be enhanced. After taking holistic consideration of the above facts, this Court is of the opinion that the compensation awarded under the impugned award requires enhancement to some extent and same is enhanced as per the table made hereinunder:- Loss of income(+) Rs.73x30x12x16x10%=42,048/- Future prospects(40%)(+) Rs.16,819.20/- Pain & Suffering(+) Hospitalization(+) Medical Bill (+) Food/Nourishment and Transportation(+) Rs.25,000/- Rs.5,500/- Rs.33,970/- Rs.10,000/- Total Rs.1,33,337/- Already Awarded Amount(-) Rs.94,056/- Enhanced amount of compensation Rs.39,281/-

17. Therefore, the present appeal is partly allowed and award passed by the learned MACT Court below is modified by enhancing [2025:RJ-JP:27313] (5 of 5) [CMA-390/2008] to Rs. 1,33,337/- from the original amount of Rs.94,056/-. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of Rs.39,281/- before the learned concerned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal within 60 days from the date of passing of this order. The claimant is also entitled to get interest on the enhanced amount of Rs. 39,281/- at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition until the realization of the said amount.

18. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. The compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is modified and enhanced as per the terms indicated above.

19. All pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. SOURAV /30 (MANEESH SHARMA),J