Allahabad High Court
Nasim Ahamad vs Smt. Shasi Pandey And 5 Others on 9 April, 2018
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2018 ALL 720
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 16 Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 1810 of 2018 Appellant :- Nasim Ahamad Respondent :- Smt. Shasi Pandey And 5 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Yogesh Kumar Singh,Pravesh Kumar Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record.
2. This First Appeal From Order has been filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to 'Act') by the appellant, against award dated 20.11.2017 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, court no.01, Ballia in Motor Accident Claim Petition no.13 of 2014, Smt. Shashi Pandey and others versus National Insurance Company Ltd. and others, whereby, the claim petition was partly allowed for compensation amount Rs.1,45,000/- along with accruing interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of presentation of the claim petition.
3. Factual matrix of the case as discernible from the certified copy of the award reflects that the accident in question took place around 8.30 A.M. on 09.07.2013, it so happened that the claimant- respondents had gone to Ballia from his village and when his jeep (U.P. 70 P 0641) reached near Tardila Bharwaliya, they met with an accident, caused by Tractor No. UP 60R- 6004, which was being driven rashly and negligently by its driver. The jeep collided with Tractor No. UP 60R- 6004. Thus, causing injury to the passengers of the jeep in question and one of them- Awadh Bihari Pandey- travelling in the jeep died on the spot. The report was lodged the very same day at 9.20 A.M. against the driver of offending vehicle. The claim petition was preferred seeking relief for Rs. 22,50,000/-. The appellant contested the case and after considering the case on its merit, the claim petition was partly allowed for Rs.Rs.1,45,000/- along with the interest at the rate of 7% per annum, which order is subject matter of consideration before this Court.
4. Considered the contention so raised and also perused the impugned award, whereby, it is gathered that after the written statement was filed by the appellant before the Tribunal as many as five issues were framed for disposal of the claim- petition.
(1) Issue number one related to the factum of accident.
(2) Issue no.2 related to fact whether the aforesaid offending vehicle was insured with the opposite party insurance company and the same was being driven in accordance with the terms and conditions of the insurance policy?
(3) Issue no.3 was based on fact whether the driver of the offending vehicle was possessing valid and effective driving licence on the date and time of the accident?
(4) Issue no.4 was one regarding contributory negligence of drivers of both the vehicles? If yes, then its effect?
(5) Issue no.5 was pertaining to fact of compensation as to what and how much compensation the claimant- respondent is entitled to receive?
5. The learned tribunal after considering the merit of the case recorded finding on aforesaid issues against the present appellant and on point of assessment of compensation considering all the prospects of the deceased and his annual income, though he was above 70 years of age, an overall compensation amount Rs.1,45,000/- was awarded along with the interest at the rate of 7% per annum.
6. Learned counsel vehemently contended that in this case statement of one of the injured Rahul Singh was recorded on the spot who has stated that the jeep (UP 70 P 0641)_itself was being driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver. The liability fastened on the present appellant owner is erroneous and illegal. He further adds that there is no evidence on record to prove that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of tractor owned by the appellant.
7. Considered the contention so raised and also perused the impugned award. Obviously, specific issues have been made on the point of accident. In this case, F.I.R. was lodged on 9.7.2013 against the driver of jeep no. UP 70 P 0641 in P.S. Khejuri, District Ballia as Case Crime No.124 of 2013, under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304A IPC. Thereafter, case was duly investigated by the I.O. who recorded the statement of the informant and other witnesses. Eyewitness account of the accident has been elaborated, and in this regard testimony of P.W.1 Ravi Kumar, who was one of the passengers of the jeep in question (UP 70P 0641), was found to be innocuous and consistent and nothing adverse has emerged in his cross- examination of this witness which may cast any shadow of doubt on the factual aspect of the accident. Therefore, fact of accident stands proved.
8. Looking to the entirety of the case, the compensation awarded appears to be just and consistent and the multiplier applied and counted by the tribunal is proper and consistent one. No interference is required.
9. In view of above, there is no error in the finding recorded by the Tribunal and the compensation awarded is just and consistent, therefore, this First Appeal From Order sans merit and the same is dismissed in limine.
10. Rs.25,000/- deposited before this Court shall be remitted to the concerned Tribunal and the amount will be adjusted towards payment to be made to the injured claimant.
11. Parties shall bear their own cost.
Order Date :- 9.4.2018 Raj