AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL TRANSPORT SERVICE vs SADGUNABEN KISHORBHAI BRAHMBHATT

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as "the learned tribunal") in MACP No.890/2000 dated 26/10/2005 by which the learned tribunal has partly allowed the said Claim Petition and has awarded a total sum of Rs.1,45,500/- towards compensation for the injuries sustained by the original injured claimant, the appellant herein - original opponent - Ahmedabad Municipal Transport Service has preferred the present First Appeal.

Though served, nobody appears on behalf of the respondent.

By the impugned judgment and award the learned tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.1,45,500/- to the original injured claimant under different heads; Rs. 90,000/- towards future loss of income

Rs. 18,000/- towards actual loss of income

Rs. 7,500/- towards medical expenses

Rs. 25,000/- towards pain, shock and suffering

Rs. 5,000/- towards transport, special food & attendants charges

======= Rs.1,45,500/-

======= 3.1 The aforesaid impugned judgment and award passed by the learned tribunal is assailed by the appellant mainly on the ground that the learned tribunal has materially erred in awarding Rs.7500/- towards the medical expenses. It is the case on behalf of the appellant that in the deposition original injured claimant had specifically admitted that the entire amount of medical expenses was reimbursed by her employer - Torrent Pharmaceuticals. It is submitted that if that is so the learned tribunal is not justified in awarding the said amount to the original injured claimant as the same can be said to be double benefit to the original injured claimant. So far as the other amount awarded by the learned tribunal under other heads is concerned, the same is not seriously disputed /opposed by the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant.

3.2 Therefore, the short question, which is posed for the consideration of this Court is, whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned tribunal is justified in awarding Rs.7500/- to the original injured claimant towards medical expenses or not? I have gone through the deposition of the original injured claimant, who is examined at Exh.23. In the cross examination, she has specifically admitted that medical bills were reimbursed by her employer. If that be so, the learned tribunal has materially erred in awarding Rs.7500/- to the original injured claimant towards medical expenses, which is already reimbursed by the employer of the original injured claimant. Despite the medical bills being reimbursed by the employer, if again the said amount is awarded to the original injured claimant, it can be said to be giving double benefit to the original injured claimant, which is not permissible. To the aforesaid extent, the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned tribunal is required to be modified and the present Appeal is required to be partly allowed.

In view of the above, the present Appeal succeeds in part. The impugned judgment and award passed by the learned tribunal in MACP No.890/2000 is modified to the extent and it is held that the original injured claimant shall be entitled to a total sum of Rs.1,38,000/- only towards compensation instead of Rs.1,45,500/- awarded by the learned tribunal. The present Appeal is partly allowed to the aforesaid extent. There shall be no order as to costs.