TRILOCHAN SAHU Vs. RAJESH MANDAVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred by the Claimant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act of 1988) questioning the legality and propriety of the award dated 24.12.2014 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, North Bastar, Kanker (CG) (for short 'the Claims Tribunal') in Claim Case No.63/2013 whereby, the Claims Tribunal, while allowing the claim in part, awarded a total sum of Rs.1,55,000/- with 6% interest per annum from the date of filing of the claim Petition till its realization, by exonerating the Insurance company from its liability. The parties to this Appeal shall be referred hereinafter as per their description in the Claims Tribunal.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 31.10.2011 at 10.30 a.m, Applicant Trilochan Sahu, a sikshakarmi was going by his motorcycle to his school. At the relevant time, he was dashed vehemently in front of one Indian Rice Mill from its opposite side by the offending vehicle 'Bolero' bearing its Registration No.CG 19 BA 6025, owned by Non-Applicant No.2-Shrawan Kumar Yadav, insured with Non-Applicant No.3-Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Company Limited, which was being driven in a rash and negligent manner by its driver, Non-Applicant No.1-Rajesh Mandavi. Owing to the alleged accident, the Applicant was injured badly wherein, his ankle and femur bone of the right leg got fractured, as a result of which, he suffered permanent disability to the extent of 40% giving rise to the institution of the claim under Section 166 of the Act of 1988, claiming a total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.8,36,000/- under various heads.

(3.) The aforesaid claim has been contested by the Non-Applicants and the Claims Tribunal, upon considering the evidence led by the parties, arrived at a conclusion that the alleged accident has occurred on 31.10.2011 due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the offending vehicle, in which, the Applicant has sustained grievous injuries as his ankle and femur bone of the right leg got fractured and by relying upon the disability certificate (Ex.P-7), it has been held that he suffered physical disability to the extent of 40%. It has been held further that the vehicle in question insured as a 'Passenger Carrying Commercial Vehicle' was being used without any permit in violation of the provision prescribed under Section 66 of the Act of 1988 and thus, by exonerating the Insurance Company from its liability, awarded a total amount of compensation to the tune of Rs.1,55,000/- with 6% interest per annum from the date of filing of the claim Petition till its realization.