NAINITAL, India, March 26 -- Uttarakhand High Court issued the following judgment/order on Feb. 25:
1. The appeal from order No.505 of 2011 has been preferred by the State of Uttarakhand under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, assailing the judgment and award dated 27.10.2010 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 102 of 2006 Umesh Chandra Pandey Vs. U.P. Seeds and Tarai Vikas Nigam and Ors., whereby, compensation to the tune of Rs.7,24,000 with interest @6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petitioner till actual payment, has been awarded in favour of the respondent-claimant.
2. The case of the respondent-claimant, in brief, is that on 14.01.2006 at about 7:15 p.m., the respondentclaimant was returning home after duty from Rudrapur towards Devriya, while sitting on the pillion seat of a motorcycle bearing registration No.UK-06-5172. When the motorcycle reached near Lalpur petrol pump, before the Dharamkanta, the motorcycle slowed down on account of traffic conditions. At that point of time, a Jeep bearing registration No.UK-04-1698 came from the side of Kichha and collided with the motorcycle. It was alleged that the said Jeep was being driven in a rash and negligent manner, as a result of which the respondent-claimant sustained injuries. The injured respondent-claimant was taken for medical treatment and subsequently a First Information Report was lodged in respect of the said accident. Claiming that the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the Jeep, respondent-claimant filed a claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation.
3. In the claim petition, respondent-claimant asserted that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the Jeep bearing registration No. UK-04- 1698. It was pleaded that respondent-claimant sustained serious injuries and incurred medical expenses and loss of income on account of the accident. The respondent-claimant further stated that he was earning prior to the accident and due to the injuries suffered, his earning capacity had been adversely affected. On these grounds, compensation was sought from the owner, driver and insurer of the offending vehicle.
4. The respondent-claimant also filed a cross objection for enhancement of compensation awarded by learned Claims Tribunal in AO No.505 of 2011, which was registered as AO No.07 of 2018. The respondent-claimant, by way of cross-objections, contends that compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is wholly inadequate and does not satisfy the statutory requirement of "just compensation" under the Motor Vehicles Act. It is submitted that despite clear evidence on record establishing permanent disability to the extent of 90%, learned Tribunal failed to assess the true impact of such disability on the claimant's earning capacity, future prospects and overall quality of life.
*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=rC8SUFuyEFsvB5V61cXUrOTe4QRfsHEEHU2RjLl4eGwZ6ncQtw0Q1%2BINB3YV72wG&caseno=AO/7/2018&cCode=1&cino=UKHC010006822018&state_code=15&appFlag=)
Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.
