BHIKHALAL DAMJI VAGHRI Vs. GALABHAI AYAR DRIVER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act')is against the judgment and award dated 4.12.1992 rendered in M.A.C.P.No.92 of 1986 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Kachchh at Bhuj, by which the claim petition preferred by the appellant-orig.claimant to recover compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- on account of the injuries sustained by him in a road accident, has been partly allowed and thereby he has been awarded a total compensation of Rs.1,02,480/- together with proportionate costs of litigation and interest at the rate of 15% per annum from the date of application till payment is made by the orig.opponents.

(2.) It was the case of the appellant claimant that the accident had occurred on 8.1.1986 on Ganhidham Bhachau road, opposite Hem Varsha Petrol Pump, at 9.00 a.m. where the Truck bearing Regn.No. GTT 5516 driven by respondent No.1 (tort feaser) was proceeding from Gandhidham towards Bhachau and when it reached near the spot of accident, it knocked down Bhikhabhai Damji Vaghari, the appellant-claimant resulting into several multiple injuries and because of that, the appellant had suffered impairment. At the relevant time, the truck was driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner and knocked down the appellant from behind. It was the say of the appellant that since respondent No.1 driver was driving the truck in a rash and negligent manner and knocked down the appellant from behind, he was liable to pay compensation. His further say was that since the truck was owned by respondent No.2, therefore, he is vicariously liable to pay the compensation and respondent No.3, being the Insurance Company will also be liable to pay the compensation as indemnifier.

(3.) According to the appellant-claimant, he was aged 30 years and was engaged in selling tooth sticks at the time of accident and his income was Rs.450/- per month. He had undergone prolonged treatment because of multiple fractures and other injuries sustained by him and that the injuries have resulted into his impotency and sterility which has rendered him unable to enjoy marital life. He has permanent physical disability to the extent of 23.91% as per the medical opinion. The appellant has, therefore, preferred the claim petition claiming compensation of Rs.3,00,000/- on various counts.