SHANKARA Vs. M GHOUSE PEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [for short, the Act] by the injured- claimant, who totally failed in his claim petition in MVC No 336 of 2003, on the file of Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Srirangapatna, a claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Act for the purpose of claiming compensation towards serious injuries that he had suffered due to an accident that occurred on 16-12-2002 involving a motor vehicle bearing registration No KA-01 A-6386, a bus owned by second respondent, driven by the first respondent at the time of the accident and insured with the third respondent-insurance company.

(2.) THE claim, which was no less than for a sum of Rs. 26.72 lakh, perhaps advised and quantified by the advocate for the claimant before the tribunal, was on the premise that the injury caused to the appellant-claimant due to the accident had left him in posttraumatic spastic/quadriplegia [all the four limbs becoming useless] and virtually leaving the injured in a vegetable like condition and is bed-laid for the rest of his life, cannot live without the aid or assistance of a constant attendant - 24/7 and 365 days.

(3.) IT is said that law is an ass, but the value and significance of a mule, can be realized and appreciated in a country like ours only by his master - washerman/laundry man/dobhi and not by any one else, as the mule a burden the beast very faithfully and dutifully carries the burden without any murmur or complaint and diligently carries it to its destination! But law gets derailed midway many a times!