VIMAL KUMAR YADAV Vs. MUKESH TIWARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles, Act challenging the award dated 29.8.2011 passed by the 1st Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) (for short 'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No.110/2010. By way of the said award, the Tribunal has rejected the claim application/compensation for the motor accident and the injury sustained by the appellant/claimant.

(2.) Brief facts leading to the instant appeal are that on 29.4.2009, the appellant/claimant, in the capacity of Conductor of a minibus bearing registration No.CG 04/E/0378 (for short 'the Bus') owned by respondent No.1 namely Mukesh Tiwari was traveling from Devbhog to Raipur and when they reached the main road, Amanaka, the Bus met with an accident as a result of which, the appellant/claimant is said to have received injuries particularly that of multiple fractures on both his legs. It is the case of the appellant/claimant that immediately after the accident, he was rushed to a nearby Government hospital and from there, he was referred to Medical College, Raipur on the same day where he remained under treatment from 29.4.2009 to 19.9.2009. In the course of the treatment, the present appellant had undergone a couple of surgeries and even steel rods were inserted in his right leg on account of complicated multiple fractures received by him in the said accident. Later on he was discharged on 19.9.2009 and again when some complications took place in his right leg, he was again admitted in private hospital i.e. in Life Worth Hospital, Samta Colony, Raipur wherein, during the course oftreatment, the right leg of the appellant/claimant had to be amputated on 23.1.2010. In January, 2010, the appellant/claimant is said to have filed a claim application before the Tribunal wherein he has very specifically narrated the entire accident and had also spelled out the nature of injury and has also disclosed the fact that in the course of his treatment, his right leg had to be amputated.

(3.) After the pleadings were complete, while recording the evidence, the appellant/claimant has specifically deposed before the Tribunal that on 29.4.09, in the course of his employment as Conductor in the Bus owned by respondent No.1, which was duly insured by respondent No.2 i.e. National Insurance Company, he met with an accident and was put to treatment from 29.4.09 to 19.09.09 at Medical College, Raipur and later on at Life Worth Hospital from 22.1.10 to 30.1.10 and there, he had to undergo amputation part.