ESHA GHOSHAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FAO 201/73 is filed by the claimant Ms. Esha Ghoshal for claiming Rs. 25,000/- as the compensation. The Tribunal had awarded only Rs. 11,881.50. FAO 226/73 is a cross-appeal by the Union of India, disclaiming the liability.

(2.) CLAIMANT Esha Ghoshal was traveling in a three-wheeler scooter No. DLR 4471 on 7-9-66. The Government truck No. DLG 7604 was transporting telephone posts from the store at Vinay Nagar to the SDO's godown near Connaught Place Exchange. The accident took place when the truck reached the crossing of Mehrauli Road and Lodhi Road, in front of the Safdarjung Tomb. According to the claimant the truck in question was being rashly and did not slow down at the crossing and hit against the three wheeler. On the other hand, the contention of the respondents was that the three-wheeler scooter came from the Lodhi Road side suddenly and hit against the truck, in spite of the fact that the truck swerved to the left to avoid the accident. The claimant has examined Shri Ganshyam PW/1 and Shri Prahlad Singh PW/2. She has also examined herself. The respondents have examined Mr. Bihari Lal RW/1 and Mr. Ramnath RW/2 in support of their version. After going through this evidence on record, the Tribunal found the truck No. DLG 7604 guilty of rash and negligent driving. The tribunal noted that after the impact the truck moved to the left and mounted on the road divider and stopped after stricking against the tree situated in the centre of the road divider. This fact was established by the photographs. The Tribunal held that this showed that the truck was being driven at a high speed and the driver was not in control of the vehicle at the time of accident. The Tribunal then rejected the plea of the Union of India that the truck in question was engaged in the discharge of a sovereign function. After going through the evidence on record myself, I am satisfied that the Tribunal's finding is eminently correct. There is no merit in the plea of sovereign immunity by the Union of India in this case as the truck in question was merely transporting telephone posts. The Union of India is, therefore, liable to pay the compensation to the claimants.

(3.) I have heard the submissions of the claimant for the enhancement of compensation. It is true that there is a shortening of her leg, but, there is no evidence to compensate the loss on the assumption that she would have been a professional dancer. However, considering the fact that she has developed a permanent limping gait, which might have been a hinderance in getting married earlier, I raise the sum of compensation to Rs. 15,000/- for pain and agony. She will also be entitled to Rs. 1881.50 towards miscellaneous expenses as awarded by the Tribunal. The claimant would be further entitled to 6 per cent simple interest from March 1970.