Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Fagulal Vanvasi (Kol) @ Faggu vs Kalyanika Kendriya Shiksha Niketan ... on 11 July, 2022

Author: Vivek Agarwal

Bench: Vivek Agarwal

                                                                       1
                                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                  AT JABALPUR
                                                                      BEFORE
                                                        HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWAL
                                                                ON THE 11th OF JULY, 2022

                                                            MISC. APPEAL No. 1076 of 2021

                                                Between:-
                                                FAGULAL VANVASI (KOL) @ FAGGU S/O SHRI
                                                DHANNULAL VANVASI KOL, AGED ABOUT 25
                                                YE A R S , OCCUPATION: LABOUR H.NO. 549
                                                GANDHI WARD NO. 3 AMARKANTAK TEH.
                                                PUSPRAJGARH P.S. AMARKANTAK DIST.
                                                ANUPPUR MP AT PREST. R/O BEHIND
                                                PANCHVATI DHABA HOUSE OF DINESH PATEL
                                                WARD NO. 15 VILL. RATAHRA P.S. CITY
                                                KOTWALI TEH. HUZUR DIST. REWA (MADHYA
                                                PRADESH)

                                                                                                  .....APPELLANT
                                                (BY SHRI ARUBENDRA SINGH PARIHAR - ADVOCATE)

                                                AND

                                        1.      KALYANIKA KENDRIYA SHIKSHA NIKETAN
                                                AMARKANTAK, POST AND P.S. AMARKANTAK
                                                DISTRICT ANUPPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                        2.      GOPAL SINGH @ GOPI S/O KHETA SINGH, AGED
                                                ABOUT 41 YEARS, R/O BARATI WARD NO. 2
                                                AMARKANTAK,     TEHSIL    PUSHPRAJGARH,
                                                POLICE STATION AMARKANTAK, DISTRICT
                                                ANUPPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                        3.      THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD. BRANCH
                                                OFFICE VINEET BHAWAN TEHSIL CHOUK,
                                                GORELA PENDRA ROAD BILASPUR OFFICE AT
                                                HOTEL MAHARAJA NH-7 TEHSIL HUZUR,
                                                DISTRICT REWA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                               .....RESPONDENTS
                                                (SHRI JAYANT NEEKHRA - ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENT
                                                NO.3)
Signature Not Verified
  SAN
                                              Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
                                        following:
Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI
Date: 2022.07.12 19:06:29 IST
                                                                             2
                                                                             ORDER

This appeal is filed by the claimant being aggrieved of award dated 30.09.2019, passed by the learned II Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rewa (M.P.), in M.V.C.No.400144/2014, on the ground that for an accident took place on 22.05.2013, when claimant was travelling in a vehicle bearing registration No. CG-4/JB/6714, as a labour in loading and unloading of bricks, met with an accident, at Anuppur road resulting in truck turned turtle. FIR was lodged registering Crime Case No.132/2013, for offence under Sections 279, 337 of Indian Penal Code and, later on, final report was submitted before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pendra Road, Bilaspur (CG).

2. It is submitted that due to accident, claimant had suffered fracture of spinal bone, but learned Tribunal has arbitrarily awarded only a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand), holding that claimant could not substantiate injury of his backbone and consequential treatment.

3. This appeal is valued at Rs.4,00,000/-.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3, in his turn, supports the award.

5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, it is evident that claimant Fagulal Vanvasi (Kol) @ Faggu, was given a certificate of injury by Apolo Hospital Bilaspur, Ex.P/9, in which it is mentioned that patient had suffered fracture of rib and was grievous injury, but appellant did not take further treatment and left against medical advice.

6. On the record, one discharge certificate issued by Lalchandani Hospital, Main Road, Dayalband, Bilaspur (C.G.), is available showing date of admission Signature Not Verified of the claimant Fagulal on 23.05.2013 and date of discharge as 06.06.2013. In SAN Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI Date: 2022.07.12 19:06:29 IST diagnosis, it is mentioned haemotorax with compound fracture D/2 with 3 poraperatus. Even operation, notice colum reflects that I-C.D. was done under local anesthesia. There is a disability certificate issued by the District Medical Board, District Hospital Anuppur, showing 45% disability sustained by Fagulal @ Faggu.

7. Taking all these facts into consideration and also a fact that claimant had produced a bill from Narmada Drug House, Ex.P/13, and there is certificate Ex.P/5, issued by Shri S.C. Shukla, T.I. Police Station Gaurela, District Bilaspur, certifying that Faggu Lal S/o Dhanau Lal, sustained injuries due to truck accident near Dharampani, Ex.P/5 and he was referred to Higher Centre for the needful and when final report Ex.P/1 was filed, then it was submitted under Sections 279, 337, 338 IPC read with Section 130(1), 177 of Motor Vehicles Act, there is no iota of doubt as to the cause of accident resulting in injuries and then subsequent treatment.

8. In view of such facts, impugned award is not only cryptic, but has failed into to take into consideration the true and correct nature of the pleadings and has also failed to award adequate compensation as is the requirement of law.

9. It has also come on record that one Dr. S.R. Paraste, Chairman of the Medical Board, District Hospital, Anuppur, was examined before the Court of law and he certified that left leg of the claimant is weak and he is limping. This is because of Monoparesis and it is called paralysis also. He cannot work as Palledar or cannot lift a heavy material. In cross-examination, he admitted that injury which was sustained by the claimant is the cause of paralysis and resultant weakening.

10. The injuries had admitted the policy bearing No.193390/31/ 2013/1192, Signature Not Verified SAN which is available on record.

11. It has also come on record that DW/2 Shambhu Dayal Sharma S/o Patiram 4 Sharma, Assistant Grade-II, from the office of Regional Transport Officer, Shahdol, certified that license of the driver Gopal Singh, S/o Kheta Singh, was valid on the date of the accident. It is evident from the policy that GVW of Tata-709EX Turbo Truck was 7450 kg. Thus, the truck will come within the definition of Light Motor Vehicle as provided under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, as its unlaiden weight did not exceed 7500 kg. Shri Shambhu Dayal Sharma had admitted that license of Gopal Singh, LMV was valid till 19.06.2016 and since the offending vehicle is a LMV, it is held that driver was having valid driving license to drive the vehicle on the date of the accident.

12. Thus, after recording a finding that accident and treatment are proved, this Court will proceed to determine compensation. Date of accident is 22.05.2013. Minimum wages for an unskilled labourer on the date of accident were to be tune of Rs.5270/- (Rupees Five Thousand Two Hundred Seventy) per month. For the injuries certified and the treatment given, claimant is entitled to wages for a period of four months on account of loss of wages and under this head, he will be entitled to a sum of Rs.21,080/- (Rupees Twenty One Thousand Eighty).

13. Under the head of pain and suffering, a sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand) is awarded.

14. Claimant was required to be seen by an attendant and, therefore, under the head of attendant, a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand), is awarded @ Rs.2500/- (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred) per month for a period of four months. Similarly, another sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) is Signature Not Verified SAN awarded @ Rs.2500/- (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred) per month for a Digitally signed by ASHWANI PRAJAPATI period of four months under the head of nutritious diet. Another sum of Date: 2022.07.12 19:06:29 IST 5 Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) is awarded under the head of transport.

15. Claimant is also entitled for loss of income on account of sustaining 45% permanent disability as has been certified by Dr. S.R. Pareste.

16. In the disability certificate dated 19.02.2014, age of the claimant is mentioned as 40 years. That means that at the time of accident, he was 39 years of age.

17. In view of such facts, taking this fact into consideration that claimant suffered Paraplegia of left leg and and doctor has certified 45% disability, functional aspect can be taken at 20% as claimant had admitted that he is working as Mali, that reduced capacity, which will come out to Rs.1054/- (Rupees One Thousand Fifty Four) per month or Rs.12,648/- (Rupees Twelve Thousand, Six Hundred Forty Eight) per annum, ovr and above which 40% is to be added towards future prospects taking loss of opportunity of income at Rs.1,77,007/- (One Lakh, Seventy Seven Thousand and Seven) per annum. In this amount of 1,77,007/-, multiplier of 15 is prescribed as held by the Supreme Court in Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation [(2009) 6 SCC 121], then compensation under the head of loss of income will come out to Rs.2,65,605/- (Rupees Two Lakhs, Sixty Five Thousand, Six Hundred and Five), over and above which claimant is entitled to compensation of Rs.96,080/- (Rupees Ninety Six Thousand and Eighty), taking total compensation of Rs.3,61,685/- (Rupees Three Lacs, Sixty One Thousand, Six Hundred and Sixty Five), in place of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand), awarded by the learned Claims Tribunal. This compensation will be payable jointly and severally by the respondents No. 1, 2 & 3, within sixty days from the date of Signature Not Verified SAN communication of the award.

18. In above terms, this appeal is disposed off.

19. Let record of the Claims Tribunal be sent back.

(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE A.Praj.