United India Insurance Company Limited vs Heera Lal And Ors

Appellant, United Insurance Company Ltd., has laid this appeal to challenge judgment & award dated 16th of October, 2018, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sagwada, District Dungarpur (for short, 'learned Tribunal'). The learned Tribunal, by the impugned judgment & award, adjudicating the claim of respondent-claimant, partly allowed it and awarded him compensation to the tune of Rs.6,66,792/-.

Succinctly stated, facts of the case are that claimant filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (for short, 'Act') before learned Tribunal, inter alia, stating that he was Khalasi on mini truck bearing No.RJ-27G-7869. On 11.01.2015, at about 11:30 AM, when the mini truck was parked near Galiyakot Mod in Sagwada, the driver suddenly moved it in reverse direction and his left foot came beneath the wheel crushing ankle besides causing other serious injuries. He was then taken to Maharana Bhupal Govt. Hospital for treatment. It is also averred that during treatment his left leg was amputated below knee. The said accident was reported to the police and FIR No.23/2015 was registered. In the claim petition, a sum of Rs.17,19,000/- was quantified and claimed as compensation under different heads.

Despite issuance of summons by learned Tribunal, driver/owner of the mini truck did not turn up and as such ex-parte proceedings were initiated against him. In the return, the appellant-insurer pleaded that the mini truck was not having valid permit and the driver too had no driving licence at the time of accident and as such it is not liable to pay compensation.

Learned Tribunal, on the basis of pleadings of rival parties, settled three issues for determination. For proving his case, respondent-claimant Heeralal himself appeared in the witness box as A.W.1 besides producing documentary evidence. In all, sixteen documents were produced by the respondent-claimant, which were exhibited. For substantiating defence, no documentary or oral evidence was tendered by non-claimant driver/owner and insurer of the vehicle.

The learned Tribunal, after conclusion of evidence of rival parties, heard final arguments and on the basis of material available on record decided Issues No.1 & 2 in favour of respondent-claimant and Issue No.3 was decided against insurer. The learned Tribunal on the basis of finding of these three issues, partly allowed the claim petition awarding a sum of Rs.6,66,792/ to the claimant.

I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned judgment & award.

Upon perusal of the impugned judgment & award as well as available material, it is abundantly clear that learned Tribunal, while deciding Issue No.1, regarding rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle, has rightly placed reliance on documentary and ocular evidence of the respondent-claimant. Adverting to finding on Issue No.2, suffice it to observe that at the time of accident, non-claimant No.1 was the owner as well as driver of the mini truck and the claimant was under his employment. In this view of the matter, in my opinion, the findings and conclusions of the learned Tribunal on Issue No.2 cannot be faulted.

While deciding Issue No.3, regarding fixing liability to pay compensation, suffice it to state that the learned Tribunal has observed that non-claimants did not produce any oral or documentary evidence to discharge its burden. With this finding, learned Tribunal repudiated objections of the insurer and fastened liability to pay the compensation on owner and insurer jointly and severally.

In the instant case, while deciding the issue of relief pertaining to quantum of compensation, the learned Tribunal, has rightly taken monthly income of an unskilled labour @ Rs.5,670/-per month being minimum wages in light of the provisions of Minimum Wages Act. Learned Tribunal upon considering the age of injured as 44 years as proved by him and relying on permanent disability certificate Ex.16 containing his photo, pressed into service multiplier of 14 for determining compensation. For making fair assessment of compensation, learned Tribunal placed reliance on the judgment of Sarla Verma & Ors. Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. [2009 (6) SCC 121]. Therefore, the assessment of compensation for loss of income to the tune of Rs.6,66,792 is just and reasonable. In all, the finding of the learned Tribunal in assessing the compensation and fixing liability to pay compensation upon the insurer is just and reasonable being in conformity with the dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court.

While concurring with the finding and conclusion of the learned Tribunal, I record my satisfaction that amount awarded is based on fair assessment and is satisfying the requirements of just compensation within the four corners of Section 168 of the Act. By no stretch of imagination, the amount of compensation determined by the learned Tribunal can be categorized as excessive or exorbitant warranting interference in exercise of appellate jurisdiction by this Court.

Resultantly, the instant appeal fails and same is, hereby, rejected.