ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. RATNAKAR MANIKNARAYAN KASHYAP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By invocation of the provisions of Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the appellant - original opponent no.3 in the claim petition, the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. (Insurer), has challenged the judgment and award of M.A.C.T. (Auxilliary) Ahmedabad, dated 24/07/03, whereby, the respondent no.1 came to be awarded a consolidated sum of Rs.3,12,800/- by way of compensation with proportionate cost and interest @ 9% per annum from the date of claim petition, against the Insurer, appellant, respondent no.2 (the driver of the offending jeep), respondent no.3 (the owner of the offending jeep), mainly on the ground that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate the contribution of the original claimant in the happening of the unfortunate road mishap and that the assessment of compensation is on a very high side, whereas, both these grounds are controverted by the learned advocate appearing for the original claimant, the breakup of which is as follows;

(2.) We have heard extensively the learned advocates appearing for the parties, upon whose request the matter is taken up today for final hearing. Originally, the claimant petition came to be filed by the original claimant for compensation of an amount of Rs.5,00,000/(five lakhs) for personal injuries sustained by him in an unfortunate road accident which occurred, on 01/10/2000, when the original claimant was proceeding on a scoter bearing registration No.GJ-1-BA-6302, on Airport - Shahibaug road. The original claimant was incharge of the scooter, whereas, the respondent no.2 - the driver who was driving the jeep bearing registration No.RJ-27-C-9634, was, also, proceeding in the same direction. The claimant alleged that the driver of the jeep upon reaching near military gate on the Shahibaug road, all of a sudden took a "U" turn and dashed against the scooter of the original claimant, as a result of which the claimant sustained serious injuries and the scooter sustained serious damages.

(3.) The original opponents no.1 and 2, the driver and the owner of the offending jeep, despite service did not appear and contest the claim. Appellant herein, original opponent no.3, Insurer, appeared and contested the claim by filing written statement, inter alia contending that the entire responsibility for the happening of the unfortunate road accident in question, was on the part of the original claimant.