5 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 143 of 2001 v. Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation) was 9led by the claimant

Heard Shri Jitendra Kumar, counsel for the appellants and Shri Utkarsh Birla, counsel for the defendant-respondent. This is owner's appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as, 'Act, 1988') challenging the judgement and award dated 22.11.2000 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Etah (hereinafter referred to as, 'Tribunal') in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 526 of 1998. Through its award, the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/- to the claimant-respondent alongwith 10% simple interest. Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 526 of 1998 (Sneh Lata Vs. Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation) was 9led by the claimant-respondent alleging that on 1.6.1998 she was injured in an accident caused due to rash and negligent driving of Bus bearing Registration No. U.P. 81 B/6348 (hereinafter referred to as, 'o<ending vehicle'). It was stated in the claim petition that at the time of accident the deceased was pregnant and she gave birth to a dead male child because of the injuries su<ered in the accident. On the aforesaid plea, the claimant sought compensation of Rs. 2,90,000/-. The respondent contested the claim petition denying the negligence of the o<ending vehicle in causing the accident and also the injuries alleged by the claimant. The plea of the appellant has not been accepted by the Tribunal in its judgement and award dated 22.11.2000. The Tribunal has held that the alleged accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the o<ending vehicle, which was owned by the appellant and because of the aforesaid accident, the claimant su<ered injuries resulting in termination of her pregnancy. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 50,000/- as compensation for termination of pregnancy, Rs. 39,672/- for medical expenses incurred by the claimant, Rs. 20,000/- for mental and physical pain, Rs. 10,000/- for loss of love and a<ection due to the abortion of the foetus and Rs. 5,000/- for having engaged house hold help. On the aforesaid plea, the Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/- to the claimant-respondent No. 1. Hence, the present appeal by the owner of the o<ending vehicle. A cross-objection has also been 9led by the claimant- respondent for enhancement of compensation. The counsel for the appellant has argued that from the evidence on record, the negligence of the driver of the o<ending vehicle is not proved and further the compensation awarded to the claimant is excessive. Rebutting the argument of the counsel for the appellant, the counsel for the claimant has argued that the evidence on record conclusively proved that the accident injuring the claimant took place due to rash and negligent driving of the o<ending vehicle by its driver and the compensation amount to the claimant is to be enhanced. For enhancement of compensation, the counsel for the claimant-respondent has relied on the judgement and order dated 16.1.2020 passed by this Court in First Appeal From Order No. 1020 of 2017. I have considered the submission of the counsel for the parties and also perused the lower court records. The issue regarding negligence of the driver of the o<ending vehicle was also an issue before this Court in First Appeal From Order No. 128 of 2001, which arose from the same accident. This Court vide its order dated 5.3.2013 passed in First Appeal From Order No. 128 of 2001 rejected the plea of the appellant in that case and aArmed the 9nding of the Tribunal that the accident had been caused due to rash and negligent driving of the o<ending vehicle. In view of the aforesaid, the plea of the appellants that the accident was not caused due to rash and negligent driving of the o<ending vehicle is rejected. So far as the compensation amount to be awarded is concerned, it is apparent from Paper Nos. 16G and 17G 9led by the claimant-respondent before the Tribunal that at the time of accident, the claimant was pregnant and because of the injuries su<ered in the accident her foetus was aborted and she gave birth to a dead male child. Paper Nos. 16G and 17G are the medical certi9cates issued by Dr. A Maini of Shivam Nursing & Maternity Home, Kashganj where the claimant-respondent was admitted after the accident. It is also apparent from the aforesaid medical certi9cates that because of the injuries and miscarriage/abortion, the claimant was in acute depression and had to remain in the hospital for 41 days. Considering the aforesaid certi9cates, the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 39,672/- as medical expenses to the claimant. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the medical expenses is aArmed. However, the Tribunal has awarded very meagre compensation to the claimant for termination of her pregnancy, physical and mental pain caused to her because of the accident, for loss of love and a<ection and also for the expenses incurred for employing any household help because of her inability to do household work during the period she remained admitted in the hospital. Considering the judgement and order dated 16.1.2020 passed by Division Bench of this Court in First Appeal From Order No. 1020 of 2017 Rs. 2,50,000/- is awarded to the claimant-respondent No. 1 for termination of her pregnancy. Further, Rs. 2,50,000/- is also awarded for physical and mental pain and shock caused to her. The claimant is also entitled to Rs. 40,000/- for loss of love and a<ection of her male child which was aborted due to the accident. So far as the compensation for not being able to do the household work during the period in which the claimant remained in the hospital, it would be appropriate to award the claimant Rs. 25,000/-. In view of the aforesaid, the compensation payable to the claimant is redetermined as follows :- (a) Termination of pregnancy (abortion of foetus) = Rs. 2,50,000/- (b) Physical and mental pain and shock to the claimant = Rs. 2,50,000/- (c) Loss of love and a<ection = Rs. 40,000/- (d) Loss caused due to failure of the claimant to do household work during the period she remained in the hospital = Rs. 25,000/- (e) Medical Expenses = Rs. 39,672/- (as awarded by the Tribunal) Thus, total compensation which the claimant is entitled to = Rs. 6,04,672/-. The compensation awarded above shall carry the same interest as awarded by the Tribunal. The award of the Tribunal is accordingly modi9ed to the aforesaid extent. The balance amount of the award alongwith the interest accruing on the same shall be deposited by the appellants within three months from today before the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Etah. The amount so deposited by the appellants shall in turn be deposited by the Tribunal in the highest interest bearing Fixed Deposit Scheme of the Post OAce or any Nationalized Bank and the receipts of the same shall be given to the claimant-respondent, who shall be entitled to withdraw the maturity amount when the Fixed Deposit matures. The maturity amount shall be credited by the bank/post oAce in any savings account of the claimant-respondent. The concerned bank or post oAce shall not permit any loan or advance against the 9xed deposits made in favour of the claimant-respondent. The Tribunal, while depositing the amount in the 9xed deposit scheme, shall communicate the directions issued by this Court to the concerned bank/post oAce. In case, the appellants fail to deposit the balance amount within three months from today, the Tribunal shall recover the same in accordance with law. With the aforesaid observations, the appeal is dismissed and cross-objection No. 21132 of 2001 9led in the aforesaid appeal is allowed. Interim order dated 7.2.2001 passed by this Court in favour of the appellants stands vacated. OAce shall transmit the records of the case to the Tribunal, at the earliest. . Order Date :- 16.8.2022 Anurag/- VERMA Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad