ADAMKHAN MOHAMED Vs. RAMESH RAYA NAIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a first defendant's appeal against the judgment and decree dated 11-7-1972 passed by the Dist Judge, North Canara in RA.199 of 1971 On his file. The relevant facts, as found established by the Court below, which are necessary for appreciation of contentions raised in this appeal are that the lorry bearing MYZ 2792 belonged to the first defendant in the suit. The second defendant was the driver of the said lorry. It is found that on 8-3-61 when defendant-2 was driving the lorry in a rash and negligent manner, he hit against PW.5 Rameah, a young boy of about 8 years and dragged the boy on the road for some distance as a result of which the boy sustained serious injuries on his left arm. He was immediately admitted to the hospital and ultimately he came out of the hospital with deformity and disability in his left hand. It is held by the lower appellate Court that the boy is not able to stretch his left hand beyond 90 degrees. The boy has deposed that he is unable to use his left hand in the normal way which stands unrebutted and unchallenged.

(2.) The lower appellate Court has found that the accident is due to rash and negligent driving of the lorry by defendant-2 and in that view, the lower appellate Court has awarded by its judgment and decree compensation to the injured boy represented by his father, Rs.9360/- along with interest thereon at 6 per cent from the date of the suit till payment from defendants 1, 2 and 4 The suit against defendant-3 is dismissed as there was no insurance by defendant-3 covering the lorry on the date of the accident. Aggrieved by the said decree the present appeal is filed by the first defendant in the suit.

(3.) The learned Advocate appearing for the appellant-first defendant vehemently argued that the claim made in the suit was untenable as the finding of driving the lorry in a rash and negligent manner was not properly established in evidence. He further submitted that the compensation claimed and awarded is highly excessive. He also submitted that the lower appellate Court was not justified in awarding interest at the rate of six per cent from the date of filing the suit.