NATUBHAI ANOPSING JADEJA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant-claimant who was serving at the relevant time, that is, on 27.9.1974 as a Sub-Inspector of Police while he was on his duty had the misfortune of meeting with the automobile accident. He was travelling in a jeep between Unjha and Mehsana at about 5.30 in the evening and a S.T. bus belonging to the Respondent-Corporation and driven by its employee in the course of its employment, was proceeding in the same direction. On account of negligence of Respondent's driver, there was a collision between the two vehicles whereby the jeep took about two to three somersaults, landed in a ditch on the side of the road and the Appellant-claimant sustained serious injuries along with some others. The claimant preferred claim petition. The Appellant-claimant claimed Rs. 75,000.00 by way of compensation and the learned Tribunal on assessment of evidence came to the conclusion that Rs. 31,304.00 would be awardable to the Appellant.

(2.) The claimant, being aggrieved by the said order, has approached this Court by way of this First Appeal, and has asked for enhanced amount of compensation. In the appeal, the claim is for Rs. 43,696.00, that is the balance of amount claimed by him before the Tribunal.

(3.) Mr. Solanki. the learned advocate appearing for the Appellant-claimant took us through the evidence of the material witnesses as well as relevant portions of the judgment of the learned Tribunal. Mr. Solanki assailed the judgment on numerous grounds and main thrust of Mr. Solanki's argument was that on account of the Appellant having sustained permanent partial disability to the extent of 50% the Appellant has been condemned to a useless life and his future prospects for promotion have been totally obliterated. This, according to Mr. Solanki, will have an adverse effect on the future income of the Appellant inasmuch as after retirement, he will be totally useless for any further employment and he will receive a lesser amount by way of pension than what he would have, had his promising career been not cut off by negligence of the Respondent's driver. But as the question regarding negligence of the Respondent's driver has been finally closed by the Tribunal's judgment it is binding on both the parties and it is no longer res Integra. We have, therefore, only to determine as to whether the Tribunal was justified in awarding the amount that it did or as to whether on proper appreciation of evidence, the amount awarded to the Appellant requires to be suitably enhanced.