Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Rakesh Kumar S/O Ganpatram vs Pawan Kumar S/O Shri Ramkumar on 21 September, 2022
Author: Anoop Kumar Dhand
Bench: Anoop Kumar Dhand
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 151/2021
Rakesh Kumar S/o Ganpatram, Aged 27 Year, R/o Sukhabas,
Tehsil Rajgadh District Churu (Raj)
----Appellant (Claimant)
Versus
1. Pawan Kumar S/o Shri Ramkumar, R/o Brahmino Ka Bash
Police Station Hamirvas Tehsil Rajgadh District Churu
(Rajasthan) (Owner And Driver Of Vehicle Of Jeep No. RJ
10 UA 2610)
2. H.D.F.C Ergo General Insurance Company Limited, Office
No.2, Third Flour C-98, Sanghvee Upasna Tawar, Shubhas
Marg C-Scheme, Jaipur 302001 (Rajasthan) (Insurance
Company Vehicle Of Jeep No. RJ 10 UA 2610)
----Respondents (Non-Claimant No.1 & 2)
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Pavan Kumar Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chanderdeep Singh Jodha Advocate.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Judgment / Order 21/09/2022 Matter comes upon application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
Application stands allowed, for the reasons stated therein. The delay in filing the appeal is condoned.
With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard on merits.
This appeal has been filed by the appellant-claimant for enhancement of compensation assailing the award dated 16.01.2020 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jhunjhunu (Raj.) in M.A.C.T No.96/2014, whereby, compensation (Downloaded on 27/09/2022 at 09:51:29 PM) (2 of 4) [CMA-151/2021] of Rs.38,400/- has been granted along with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition in favour of the appellant-claimant.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant- claimant filed a claim petition under Section 166/140 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act of 1988') to claim compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the accident occurred on 03.01.2014, which was partly allowed and the Tribunal has awarded compensation as aforesaid.
However, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the appellant-claimant has preferred this appeal for enhancement.
Learned counsel for the appellant-claimant submits that while deciding issue No.2, the Tribunal has committed an error in holding that there was 50% contributory negligence on the part of the appellant-claimant. Learned counsel further submits that there was no such evidence available on the record before the Tribunal to record such finding. Learned counsel submits that while assessing the compensation is very petty and inadequate amount has been granted, which needs suitable enhanced by this Court.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company has opposed the arguments raised by learned counsel for the appellant-claimant and submits that the Tribunal has not committed any error while deciding issue No.2 and holding that there was 50% contributory negligence on the part of the appellant-claimant also. Learned counsel submits that the accident has occurred in middle of the road and after investigation, police has submitted charge-sheet against the appellant-claimant as well as the respondent No.1, driver of the offending vehicle. Learned (Downloaded on 27/09/2022 at 09:51:29 PM) (3 of 4) [CMA-151/2021] counsel further submits that under these circumstances, the Tribunal has recorded a cogent finding that there was 50% contributory negligence on the part of the appellant-claimant also.
Learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance Company further submits that the appellant-claimant has sustained two grievous injuries for which the Tribunal has passed an order of granting Rs.20,000/-. Learned counsel submits that for the medical bills, a sum of Rs.34,196/- has been awarded. Learned counsel submits that after the accident, the appellant-claimant remained admitted in hospital for a period of about 15 months and under this head, a lumpsum amount of Rs.22,500/- has been awarded. Learned counsel submits that amount so determined by the Tribunal is just and proper, which needs no interference by this court.
Heard and considered the arguments raised by the counsel for both the parties.
In the present case, the appellant-claimant met with an accident on 03.01.2014. A perusal of the impugned award indicates that the accident has occurred in middle of the road and after investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant-claimant as well as the respondent No.1, driver of the offending vehicle. Hence, the Tribunal has not committed any error in deciding issue No.2 against the appellant-claimant.
This Court finds that in the aforesaid accident, the appellant- claimant has not sustained any permanent disability and no such certificate has been produced on the record.
Impugned award indicates that the appellant-claimant has sustained two grievous injuries for which adequate amount of compensation has been assessed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has (Downloaded on 27/09/2022 at 09:51:29 PM) (4 of 4) [CMA-151/2021] assessed the compensation for the grievous injuries, hospital charges, reimbursement of medical claim and in the head of physical and mental pain and suffering also and has computed the compensation in favour of the appellant-claimant, i.e., a sum of Rs.76,696/-. Since there was 50% contributory negligence on the part of the appellant-claimant, the Tribunal has deducted 50% amount of determined compensation and passed an award of Rs.38,400/- in favour of the appellant-claimant, which appears to be just and proper and the same cannot be treated as inadequate.
It is the settle proposition of law that the appellant-claimant may not claim compensation as a windfall and if the compensation assessed by the Tribunal is just and proper, the same needs no interference by the Court of appeal.
In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is not inclined to entertain this appeal.
In that view of the matter, the appeal is, hereby, dismissed.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Sanjay Kumawat-24 (Downloaded on 27/09/2022 at 09:51:29 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)