MADAN GOPAL GOEL Vs. VIPIN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal arises out of the award dated 27th March, 2000 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karkardooma, Delhi whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 3,10,000/- along with interest @ 12% per annum to the appellant.

(2.) THE factual scenario in nutshell is as follows: the appellant, Sh. Madan Gopal Goel met with an accident on 16/3/1994. The appellant was of 36 years at the time of accident and was doing business as a wholesale dealer in electrical goods. He stopped his car at the crossing near Samachar Appartments as the traffic lights turned red but in the meantime, a truck bearing registration no. DIG-178 driven by Respondent no. 1, sh. Vipin Kumar, in a very rash and negligent manner and at a very high speed came from behind and hit the two-wheeler scooter driven by the appellant. The scooter was dragged upto a considerable distance and left leg of the appellant got entangled in the rear tyre of the two-wheeler scooter; as a result the appellant sustained multiple fractures. The left leg of the appellant was crushed and on the following day, i. e. , 17/3/1994, his left leg was amputated above knees resulting in permanent disability to the extent of 80%. He remained confined to bed for a long time and also suffered fracture in the right wrist; internal wounds in spinal chord and the entire rib-cage; muscle rupture above abdomen near liver and rib-cage and multiple bruises and lacerations all over the body.

(3.) THE counsel for the appellant, Mr. S. Sirish Kumar has assailed the impugned award dated 27/3/2000 on four grounds. The first ground rounding on the impugned award is that the learned tribunal has erred in awarding general damages at a meager amount of Rs. 75,000 in the circumstances of the case. The second ground lashed out is that the monthly income of the appellant has been taken as Rs. 1420 when the appellant claimant had proved his monthly income at rs. 4000. The third ground of challenge is that the rate of interest @ 12% has been applied by the learned tribunal, which is on a lower side, in place of 18%. The fourth ground on which the present appeal is based is that the interest has been awarded to the appellant from 1/3/1996 and not from 12/9/1994, which is the date of filing of the claim petition and that the tribunal has grossly erred in awarding a sum of Rs. 3,09,187, which is on the lower side, towards compensation when the claimant appellant claimed a sum of Rs. 15,33,000 in his claims petition.