STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Vs. UMESH CHANDRA PANDEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal from order No.505 of 2011 has been preferred by the State of Uttarakhand under Sec. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, assailing the judgment and award dtd. 27/10/2010 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 102 of 2006 Umesh Chandra Pandey Vs. U.P. Seeds and Tarai Vikas Nigam and Ors., whereby, compensation to the tune of Rs.7,24,000.00 with interest @6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petitioner till actual payment, has been awarded in favour of the respondent-claimant.

(2.) The case of the respondent-claimant, in brief, is that on 14/1/2006 at about 7:15 p.m., the respondent- claimant was returning home after duty from Rudrapur towards Devriya, while sitting on the pillion seat of a motorcycle bearing registration No.UK-06-5172. When the motorcycle reached near Lalpur petrol pump, before the Dharamkanta, the motorcycle slowed down on account of traffic conditions. At that point of time, a Jeep bearing registration No.UK-04-1698 came from the side of Kichha and collided with the motorcycle. It was alleged that the said Jeep was being driven in a rash and negligent manner, as a result of which the respondent-claimant sustained injuries. The injured respondent-claimant was taken for medical treatment and subsequently a First Information Report was lodged in respect of the said accident. Claiming that the accident occurred solely due to the rash and negligent driving of the Jeep, respondent-claimant filed a claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation.

(3.) In the claim petition, respondent-claimant asserted that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the Jeep bearing registration No. UK-04- 1698. It was pleaded that respondent-claimant sustained serious injuries and incurred medical expenses and loss of income on account of the accident. The respondent-claimant further stated that he was earning prior to the accident and due to the injuries suffered, his earning capacity had been adversely affected. On these grounds, compensation was sought from the owner, driver and insurer of the offending vehicle.