Amba Lal Singhal vs Chuhar Singh and Others

S.P. Kurdukar, C.J.—Both these L.P.A. No. 776 and 777 of 1984 can be disposed of by this common judgment since they arise out of a common judgment given by the learned Single Judge in First Appeal No. 5 of 1980 and First Appeal No. 6 of 1980, Both these appeals arise out of a common award made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal.

In order to consider the rival contentions raised before us, it would be necessary to set out few facts.

Three persons namely Rajinder Kumar, Hitesh Kumar and Amar Nath Garg were travelling in a car on October 16,1972. At about 9 P.M. there was a headon collision between the car and an oil tanker near Butana on the Ambala -Karnal G.T. Road. In that accident Rajinder Kumar and Hitesh Kumar were killed whereas Amar Nath Garg sustained injuries.

On March 24, 1973, two claim petitions were filed before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Karnal. Parents of Rajinder Kumar in heir claim petition claimed Rs. 25,000/- towards compensation whereas injured Amar Nath Garg claimed Rs. 9500/-. Both the parties led oral and documentary evidence before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Karnal. The learned Judge of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, vide his award dated 10.9.1979 awarded Rs. 10,000/- by way of compensation to the parents of the deceased Rajinder Kumar and Rs. 500/- to the injured Amar Nath Garg. Beiog aggrieved by this award, the parents of Rajinder Kumar filed First Appeal No. 6 of 1980. Both these appeals were heard by learned Single Judge and vide common impugned judgment dismissed both the appeals. It is against this judgement & order passed by learned Single Judge that the present L.P.As are filed by the respective claimants.

It is not and cannot be disputed that the accident in question was due to the negligence of the oil tanker. The finding recorded by the Tribunal and learned Single Judge need no interference and we accordingly confirm the same. Both these appeals are contested by the Oriental Fire and General Insurance Company, the third respondent.

Mr. Goel, learned counsel appearing in support of both these appeals urged that the award of Rs. 10,000/- in the case of Rajinder Kumar is not only ridiculous but totally against the scheme and object of the Act. Learned Counsel urged that although Rajinder Kumar was aged about 18 years and studying in B.Sc. final, he was a bright student and his parents were wanting him to become a doctor. He further argued that having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the award of compensation of Rs. 10,000/- is too meager and the same be quashed and set aside.

As regard the compensation awarded to injured Amar Nath Garg, he urged that the Tribunal and learned Single Judge have totally ignored the material evidence on record. Mr. Goel urged that the evidence of injured Amar Nath Garg clearly indicates that he was one of the occupants in the Car which met with the fatal accident on October 16, 1972. The doubt entertained by the Tribunal and learned Single Judge as regard the identity of the injured Amar Nath Garg is totally imaginary and there was no reason what-so-ever for injured Amar Nath to come forward and lay a false claim of compensation. Mr. Goel also urged that the medical papers produced during the course of trial, do indicate the name of Amar Nath although the Surname ''Garg'' is not mentioned therein. There was no challenge to the Medical papers before the trial court and if this being so, it was not proper on the part of the Tribunal and learned Single Judge to entertain any such doubt about the identity of Amar Nath Garg.

On the issue of grant of proper compensation Mr. Goel relied upon reported decision in Mohd Muzzaffar and another v. Mohd Sultan Sheikh 1980 ACJ 616. In this case also, student studying in 5th standard was knocked down and claimants were awarded a sum of Rs. 25,000/- by way of compensation. He also drew out attention to the decision of the Delhi High Court in Subash Rani etc. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation etc., . It was again a case where a student aged 17 years old studying in B.Sc. Ist year was knocked down by the vehicle belonging to Delhi Transport Corporation. The learned Single Judge of Delhi High Court awarded an amount of Rs. 82,500/-. Relying upon both these judgments, he urged that the claimants be awarded Rs. 25,000/- and Rs. 9,500/- respectively in these appeals.

Mr. Khosla, learned counsel appearing for the third respondent urged that the judgment of the learned Single Judge suffers from no infirmity. He further urged that Rajinder Kumar was hardly 18 years old student and his parents being well settled, there was no question of dependency. He also urged that it would be a highly imaginary and speculative to assume that Rajinder Kumar would have become a doctor or achieve a highest position in the life. Mr. Khosla urged that both these appeals are devoid of any merits and the same be dismissed.

With the assistance of the learned Advocate for the parties, we went thought he record. As far as the compensation a awardable to Rajinder Kumar''s parents is concerned, in our opinion, the award of Rs. 10,000/- is simply ridiculous. Rajinder Kumar was 18 years old boy and he was doing final B.Sc. The back-ground of the parents shows that they are in business and ! certainly it would be reasonable to assume that Rajinder Kumar would have atleast joined the business and continued the same. Assuming he was to join some service, he would have been reasonably well placed. It would also be not unreasonable on the part of the parents to expect dependency on the children during their old age. Bearing in mind these factors, in our opinion, the award of Rs. 10,000/- is totally insufficient and the claimants must be awarded Rs. 25,000/- as demanded by them.

Coming to the claim of the injured Amar Nath Garg, award of Rs. 500/- is too ridiculous and not benefitting to the injuries sustained by him. He had sustained head injury and an injury to his Jaw. He remained in the hospital for five days. The identity in our opinion having regard to the material on record is beyond any doubt. The evidence on the record clearly supports the claim laid by Amar Nath Garg, for Rs. 9,500/-. The learned Single Judge as well as the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal has taken a very rigid view of the matter ignoring the basic facts. Injuries sustained by injured Amar Nath Garg were fairly serious. In addition Amar Nath Garg had to under go lot of mental tension. In our opinion, both the appeals deserve to be allowed.

ORDER

L.P.A. No. 776 of 1984 and L.P.A. No. 777 of 1984 arc allowed. The impugned judgments and awards are modified and the respondents are directed to pay to the appellants in L.P.A. No. 776 of 1984 a sum of Rs. 25,000/- and to the appellant in L.P.A. No. 777 of 1984 a sum of Rs. 9500/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing the claim petitions till the date of payment. If the appellants have received any amount under the impugned awards, credit thereof shall be given to the respondents.

Mr. Goel, appearing for the appellants in L.P.A. No. 776 of 1984 states that Smt. Sheela Devi, the second appellant, who was the mother of Rajinder Kumar died during the pendency of the appeal. He prayed that the name of the said appellant be deleted. The name is accordingly deleted. Costs in each appeal is quantified at Rs. 500/-