DINESHKUMAR CHHATRASINH KOLI PATEL Vs. KACHRABHAI MANABHAI GARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The claimant is challenging the judgment dtd. 1/1/2019 passed by the MACT (Aux), Dahod at Limkheda in MACP (New) no.299/17 (Original MACP no.3250/00). The claimant was minor at the time of the accident which occurred on 12/10/1998 and for that, the FIR was filed at Limkheda Police Station bearing I-CR no.249/98. The claimant was going from Limkheda to his Village on cycle to sell milk. He stated that he was riding his cycle slowly with due care and caution. While passing Limkheda Gram Panchayat at about 7.00 a.m., he faced the accident since opponent no.1 came driving his tempo bearing registration no.GJ-17 X- 3564 in a rash and negligent manner and with an excessive and uncontrollable speed, opponent no.1 lost control over the tempo which left the road and came on the side and dashed the claimant who was as per the plaint was aged about 14 years who had filed his application through the guardian and next friend his father Chhatrasinh Patel. On attaining majority, cause title was amended and the minor himself pursued the matter. The original claim petition was renumbered as MACP no.3889/04 and thereafter again numbered as MACP no.299/17.

(2.) The observation of the Tribunal shows that he had sustained 35.47% permanent disability. The disability certificate was issued by Adarsh Orthopedic Hospital, Limkheda which was produced on record at Exh.29A. The parties had produced the purshis at Exh.29 to consider 10% physical disability for the body as a whole. The claimant minor would have suffered the disability and the said disability would have continued to affect his day to day life.

(3.) In the case of Master Mallikarjun Vs. Divisional Manager, The National Insurance Company Limited and Anr., reported in AIR 2014 SC 736, it has been observed by the Hon'ble Apex Court, while considering the claim by a victim child, has categorically held that it would be unfair and improper to follow the structured formula as per the Second Schedule to the MV Act for more than one reasons. The relevant observations are as under:-