AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Indermeet Kaur, J.—This appeal has impugned the Award dated 18.3.2010. Compensation in the sum of Rs. 1,92,000/- had been awarded in favour of the Petitioner along with interest at 7.5%.
Facts emanating are that on 4.4.2003 the Petitioner being a driver of an Indica Car while driving this vehicle, at the Burari red light chowk, suffered an accident with a tempo; contention being that the tempo was being driven in a rash and negligent manner. Indica car of the Petitioner was damaged and driver sustained injuries. FIR No. 148/2003 had been registered against the driver of the offending vehicle.
The Insurance Company has filed the present appeal. Contention is three fold; it is contended that the entire bills had not been filed by the Petitioner to substantiate his claim for award of damages in his favour; second contention was that negligence had not been proved of the offending vehicle i.e. of the tempo; the third and last argument was that no compensation could have been awarded under any other miscellaneous head as has been noted on page 29 of the impugned award; except for the amount awarded under sub-head No. 1 the amounts awarded under the other different head are an illegality and are liable to be set aside. The counsel for the Petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment of the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. APSRTC II (2009) ACC 287 to support her submission that u/s 165 of the Motor Vehicle Act damages can only be awarded to property which in turn means to damage to the vehicle and cannot be allowed on any other count.
None has appeared for the Respondent.
Record shows that the "Repaired Damages" under the head of compensation awarded had been in the sum of Rs. 1,45,000/-; this was keeping in view the 14 bills which had been proved by the Petitioner (Ex.PW-1/1 to Ex.PW-1/14) which bills had not been disputed; the final bill dated 11.7.2003 was in the sum of Rs. 1,44,460/-. This amount of Rs. 1,45,000/- awarded under the head of "Repaired Damages" calls for no interference.
The other amounts awarded as towing charges, inconvenience caused to the Petitioner, conveyance charges i.e. the amount spent by the Petitioner while his vehicle was being repaired, loss of income in this intervening period are illegal and impermissible.
Section 165 of the Motor Vehicle Act reads as follows:
Claims Tribunals: (1) A State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, constitute one or more Motor Accident Claims Tribunals (hereinafter in this Chapter referred to as Claims Tribunal) for such area as may be specified in the notification for the purpose of adjudicating upon claims for compensation in respect of accidents involving the death of, or bodily injury to, persons arising out of the use of motor vehicles, or damages to any property of a third party so arising, or both.
"Damages to any property" as occurring in this Section refers to a direct damage to the property alone i.e. to the vehicle in question which in this case was the TATA India vehicle. Damages assessed on that account was rightly awarded in the sum of Rs. 1,45,000/-. The damages or loss suffered by the owner of the vehicle due to the vehicle having remained idle during the period of its repair are not permissible u/s 165 of the M.V. Act. The grant of these amounts is an illegality; they are liable to be set aside. This view is supported by the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court reported in New India Assurance Co. (supra); It is only the Civil Court which can pass a decree on other counts;
The Tribunal had rightly relied upon the ratio of the judgment of this Court reported in National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Pushpa Rana and Others, , Delhi to hold that certified copies of the criminal record including FIR, recovery memos, mechanical inspection report are sufficient proof to conclude that the driver was negligent; FIR had been registered in this case u/s 279/337 of the IPC at Police Station Timarpur. The mechanical inspection report of the Indica Car had revealed damages on its rear side whereas the mechanical inspection report of the Indica Car had revealed damages on the front and left side meaning thereby that the offending vehicle had hit the TATA Indica Car from the rear side. The impugned Award on no other count calls for any interference. The Award is accordingly modified. The Petitioner is awarded compensation in the sum of Rs. 1,45,000/- which shall carry interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of the institution of the petition i.e. 22.8.2007 till the dispatch of the notice to claimant and his counsel intimating the deposit of the awarded amount.
Appeal is disposed off in the above terms.