Patiram Baghel vs Kallaram and Others

J.K. Maheshwari, J.—Assailing the award dated 26th October, 2007 passed by the 3rd Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in Claim Case No. 177/2008 on the point of inadequacy of the compensation, the injured appellant has preferred this appeal u/s 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for an accident took place on 28th September, 2007 in which he sustained 100 % permanent disability. The appellant had filed the claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 13,25,000/- for the injuries sustained by him. The reply to the claim petition was filed and after recording the evidence, the Tribunal has awarded the total sum of Rs. 3,73,000/-. The certificate of permanent disability is available on record. The Tribunal believing the certificate of permanent disability recorded a finding as regard to the permanent disability to the extent of 100%.

As the incident occurred, negligence of driver of driving the offending vehicle, the issue of liability jointly and severally to pay compensation have been decided recording the findings in favour of the appellant by the Tribunal. None of those findings have been assailed at the instance of the respondents i.e. owner, driver or Insurance Company by filing the cross-appeal or the cross-objection, however it is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail to burden the judgment on the said issues. It is only the inadequacy of the compensation which has been assailed, however the arguments in detail have been considered in succeeding paragraphs.

Ms. Meena Singhal, learned Counsel representing the appellants contends that the injured at the time of accident was 45 years or age and the earning so accepted by the Tribunal is inadequate and the multiplier so applied is also inappropriate. However, it is submitted that the compensation so awarded by the Tribunal in other heads are also inappropriate i.e. pain and sufferings, transport conveyance, special diet, etc. and looking to the case of the amputation appropriate amount of award may be awarded. In view of the foregoing submissions, enhancement of the compensation so awarded by the Claims Tribunal is prayed for.

Shri R.V. Sharma, learned Counsel representing respondent No. 3 has submitted legal objection about the cross-objection against the co-defendant, however, on the issue of liability is concerned, it shall be rejected and so far as the other issues are concerned i.e. 100% permanent disability related to the claimant, he is nothing to say about the same.

After hearing learned Counsel for the parties, first of all the issue of cross objection is required to be seen. Looking to the provisions of Order XLII Rule 22 of CPC, the cross-objection against the co-defendant cannot be maintained, however, it is rejected against the respondent No. 3. So far as the other issues related to the findings of the Tribunal is concerned, I have gone through the submission of the treating Doctor as well as the Doctor who has given the certificate of 100% permanent disability and on perusal of the material available on record. The findings of the Tribunal about the 100% permanent disability is just and proper and no interference is warranted in this regard. Accordingly, the cross-objection filed by the respondent No. 6 is hereby rejected. Coming to the point of enhancement of the compensation so awarded by the Tribunal. It is to be seen that the accident has taken place on 28th September, 2007 and looking to the earning capacity of the injured, the findings of the earning so accepted by the Tribunal is inappropriate. The earning of the injured is accepted as Rs. 3,000/- per month then his annual income comes to Rs. 36,000/- and looking to the future prospects of the injured the multiplier of 13 is applied then the loss of dependency comes to Rs. 4,68,000/- and if Rs. 34,000/- is added as awarded by the Tribunal towards other heads then it comes to Rs. 5,02,000/- and if Rs. 50,000/- is further added towards pain and sufferings and also Rs. 50,000/- is added towards transport and conveyance, special diet, etc. then the total amount of compensation comes to Rs. 6,02,000/- and after deducting the amount of compensation so awarded by the Tribunal i.e. Rs. 3,73,000/- then the enhanced amount of compensation comes to Rs. 2,29,000/-, which shall be payable along-with the interest from the date of filing of the claim petition. In view of the forgoing discussions, the appeal succeeds and is hereby allowed in part. The appellant is held entitled to receive the enhanced amount of Rs. 2,29,000/- in addition to the amount of compensation already awarded by the Claims Tribunal. The enhanced amount shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization. In the facts of the case, parties are directed to bear their own costs.