Gouri Shanker vs Mohd. Iqbal & Ors

Tashi Rabstan, J

This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 13.06.2014 delivered by the Presiding Officer, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,

Jammu in Claim No.24/2012, whereby the claimant-Gouri Shanker has been held entitled to receive compensation for an amount of Rs.3,19,000/-

along with pendentelite and future interest @ 7.5% per annum except on the amount of loss of future income from the owner payable by insurance

company with right to recover the same from the owner-insured.

The facts as borne out from the record are that a Tipper bearing No.JK11-4837, while being driven rashly and negligently, hit the appellant-claimant

on 25.03.2011 at about 10.30 AM at Yard No.6, Narwal, Jammu, as a result of which received injuries and his left leg got fractured. Firstly, he

remained admitted in Bee Enn Charitable Hospital, Jammu and thereafter he was operated upon in a hospital at Amritsar (Punjab). The petitioner as

per the disability certificate issued by the Board of Doctors suffered a permanent disability of 30% which when compared to whole body shall be

reduced by 50%.

Appellant-Gouri Shanker filed a claim petition before the learned Tribunal and the learned Tribunal passed the award dated 13.06.2014 holding the

appellant entitled to receive compensation for an amount of Rs.3,19,000/-along with pendentelite and future interest @ 7.5% per annum except on the

amount of loss of future income from the owner payable by insurance company with right to recover the same from the owner-insured. Being not

satisfied the appellant has filed the instant appeal seeking enhancement of the award.

Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, examined the pleadings, documents and perused the record of learned Tribunal.

Admittedly, the appellant received injuries in a motor vehicular accident involving the offending vehicle being driven rashly and negligently by its

driver on 25.03.2011. It has also not been disputed that the appellant was operated upon in a hospital at Amritsar. Further, the record shows that the

appellant visited the hospital at Amritsar on different occasions between 26.03.2011 to 17.10.2011. Since the appellant was operated upon in a hospital

at Amritsar and thereafter visited Amritsar on several occasions for follow-up checkup, an attendant must have remained there with the appellant on

all these occasions. However, the award shows that the amount on these counts have not been awarded in favour of appellant. Therefore, I deem it

proper to modify the award and held that besides the awarded amount, the appellant shall also be entitled to an amount of Rs.20,000/- along with

pendentelite and future interest @ 7.5% per annum being the amount incurred on transportation charges as well as the expenses incurred on the

attendant.

Before the learned Tribunal, the Insurance Company took the plea that the offending vehicle was being plied without a valid route permit. Learned

Tribunal was of the view that the route permit of offending vehicle had expired on 18.01.2011, thereafter was renewed on 16.06.2011 having its

validity upto 18.01.2012. Since the accident had occurred on 25.03.2011 and the validity of route permit had already expired on 18.01.2011, as such

the Tribunal fastened the liability to pay the awarded amount on the owner/insured of offending vehicle. Vide the impugned award, learned Tribunal

directed the insurance company to pay the awarded amount with right to recover the same from the owner-insured.

Now the question arises for consideration is: whether the owner/insured can be held liable for payment of compensation?

Before proceeding further, it would be appropriate to reproduce hereunder section 81(5) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988:

“81. Duration and renewal of permits. â€" (1)….(4) (5) Where a permit has been renewed under this section after the expiry of the period thereof,

such renewal shall have effect from the date of such expiry irrespective of whether or not a temporary permit has been granted under clause (d) of

section 87, and where a temporary permit has been granted, the fee paid in respect of such temporary permit shall be refunded.â€​

Admittedly, the offending vehicle caused the accident on 25.03.2011 at Yard No.6, Narwal, Jammu and the route permit was valid for all J&K

roads. The validity of route permit expired on 18.01.2011, whereas it came to be renewed on 16.06.2011 upto 18.01.2012; meaning thereby the route

permit came to be renewed for a period of one year upto 18.01.2012, thus the renewal of route permit was having retrospective effect. Further, as per

Section 81(5) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, where a route permit is renewed after the expiry of period thereof, such renewal shall have effect from

the date of such expiry.

Further, even if it is presumed that what was pleaded by appellant-Insurance Company before the learned Tribunal was correct, still it cannot

avoid the liability to pay the amount of compensation to the injured, as the defences available to it under Section 149(2) of the Act are very limited.

Non-renewal of Route Permit is not the defence available to the Insurance Company to avoid liability to compensate the third party. Further,

enactment of Motor Vehicles Act is welfare legislation with an objective to give financial aid to the victims of motor vehicular accidents and also to

the persons who are deprived of their physical capabilities because of such accidents. This legislation aids such victims or their dependants to lead a

respectable life. Thus, the interpretation of various sections of Motor Vehicles Act shall be towards the fulfillment of these objectives and not to block

the compensation on non-sustainable grounds.

The case before this Court is not a case where there was no Route Permit at all, therefore, it cannot be said that the vehicle was being plied

without a route permit.

Thus, the learned Tribunal was wrong in holding that since at the time of accident, the offending vehicle had no valid route permit, which came to

be renewed on 16.06.2011, as such the owner/insured was liable to pay the awarded amount of compensation.

In view of the aforesaid discussion, the impugned award merits to be modified. Accordingly, the impugned award is modified and it is held that

besides the awarded amount, the appellant shall also be entitled to an amount of Rs.20,000/- being the amount incurred on transportation charges as

well as the expenses incurred on the attendant. Thus, in all the appellant shall be entitled to receive compensation for an amount of Rs.3,39,000/- along

with pendentelite and future interest @ 7.5% per annum except on the amount of loss of future income from the insurance company. Let the awarded

amount be released in favour of appellant after proper verification and identification in terms of the conditions, if any, as contained in the impugned

award.

Registry to send down the record of learned Tribunal along with a copy of this judgment.

Disposed of along with connected MA(s), if any.