SMT. GYANDEVI SAHU Vs. HARI RAM BAGHEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by the Claimant is directed against the award dated 25.05.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kanker, District North Bastar, (hereinafter called 'the Tribunal') in Claims Case No. 140 of 2008 whereby the learned Tribunal awarded Rs. 2,30,810/- to the claimant.

(2.) This appeal has been filed by the Appellant/Claimant for enhancement of the compensation and the State has filed cross-objection (IA No. 1) that Rs. 75,000/- paid by the State towards expenses during the treatment of the deceased should be deducted.

(3.) The undisputed facts are that the deceased Ramji Sahu was travelling on his moped which was hit by a vehicle i.e. Scorpio bearing registration No. CG 02 /3253 belonging to the State Government. The stand of the Claimant is that in fact at the time of accident, the moped of the deceased was stationary. The finding of negligence arrived at by the learned Tribunal has not been disputed before me. Therefore, I will only deal with the issue of quantum of compensation. It appears that after the accident took place on 01.02008, injured Ramji Sahu remained hospitalized upto 14.02008 and a lot of money was spent on his treatment. The learned Tribunal has come to the conclusion that an amount of Rs. 2,12,810/- (Rs.81,000+Rs.1,27,310+Rs.4,500) was spent on the treatment of the deceased. In addition to the above, the learned Tribunal also awarded Rs. 5000/- for special diet; Rs. 3000/- for conveyance and Rs. 10,000/- for funeral expenses, pain and suffering etc. i.e. a total sum of Rs. 2,30,810/-. However, the Tribunal has also ordered in para 19 that the amount of Rs. 75,000/- paid by the State is to be deducted from this amount. As far as this part of the award is concerned, this is not seriously challenged and what is under challenge before me is that portion of the award whereby the learned Tribunal has held that since the Appellant/Claimant is now getting pension of Rs. 5000/- per month, she cannot be said to be dependent on the deceased and therefore, she is not entitled to any amount as compensation.