NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE Vs. MAINA SUNDRI JAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (in short the Tribunal) whereby he awarded Rs.15,540.00 alongwith interest from the date of application as compensation in favour of Smt Maina Sundri Jain.

(2.) Briefly the facts of the case are that SmtMaina Sundri Jain on account of an accident which took place on 7th December, 1971 sustained fracture of Pelvis Ring of hip bone apart from numerous other injuries all over her body. The said accident was caused by the truck owned by the appellant/ NDMC. Smt. Maina Sundri Jain was travelling in three wheeler scooter alongwith her husband and another lady Smt Saria Devi. They were returning after attending the funeral of one of their relations. They were proceeding from R.K.Puram to Darya Ganj. The scooter in which they were travelling had hardly crossed the Indian Oil Petrol Pump on Willingdon Cresent near Talkatora Garden when the truck driven by Hari Chand, respondent No.2 in rash and negligent manner came from the opposite side and struck against the three wheeler scooter. Because of that accident the husband of SmtMaina Sundri Jain died. SmtMaina Sundri Jain remained in the hospital for two days and for about four months confined to bed on account of the injuries sustained and the fracture on her hip bone. She filed a claim under the Motor Vehicle Act (in short the Act) before the Tribunal. Her claim petition was listed as Claim No.354/79 wherein she had claimed Rs. 1 lakh as compensation.

(3.) The Tribunal after considering the evidence, awarded compensation of Rs.15,540.00 in her favour. Both the parties felt aggrieved with the said award. This appeal has been preferred by N.D.M.C., primarily on the ground that the fracture and the injuries sustained by Smt Maina Sundri Jain did not make her hundred percent disabled. In her claim petition she had not mentioned how much money was spent by her on her treatment nor furnished details of any other expenses. In fact the actual expenses incurred by her were neither pleaded nor proved. Therefore, in the absence of furnishing details of expenses i.e. on medicines and loss of earning, the Tribunal erred in awarding Rs. 15,540.00 to a house wife with costs and interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing the petition. In fact the Tribunal relied more on extrenuous consideration than the evidence on record. There were two claims filed before the Tribunal arising out of the same accident. The Tribunal allowed interest in one case from the date of award but in the other case the Tribunal awarded interest from the date of the claim petition. Hence, the award is liable to be set aside.