NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. ARVINDKUMAR P VEGAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed by the Insurance Company against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Bhavnagar dated 9th January, 1997 passed in M.A.C. Petition No. 442 of 1996 under which the claimant respondent No. 1, who was injured in motor vehicle accident, has been awarded Rs. 70,000/- together with interest thereon at the rate of 15% per annum from the date of petition till realisation with proportionate costs. Learned counsel for the appellant has raised two fold contentions in this case. Firstly it is contended that the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding Rs. 18,000/- under the head of economic loss due to the disability to the claimant respondent. The next attack is made on the item of Rs. 15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal to him for mental agony, pain, shock and suffering.

(2.) I have given my thoughtful consideration to these contentions raised by the learned counsel for the appellant. It is no more res integra that the insurance company has only statutory defence to be raised in the claim application pertaining to the compensation for death or injury resulting from motor vehicle accident. The insurance company, in view of the settled position of law, cannot raise in the appeal filed against the award the defence other than what are available to it under the statute. These two contentions raised by the learned counsel for the appellant challenging the award do not fall under the statutory defence available to the insurance company and only on this ground the appeal deserves to be rejected. Be that as it may. Otherwise also on merits I do not find any substance in any of the contentions. It is true that because of the injury sustained by the claiming-respondent No. 1 actual economic loss has not been sustained by him. He continued to be in service and getting his pay and allowances. Merely because he has not sustained any economic loss he will not disentitle himself for the amount of compensation to be awarded to him under the head of economic loss. Similarly, taking into consideration the nature of injuries it cannot be said that the amount of Rs. 15,000/- awarded under the head of mental agony, pain, shock and suffering is towards higher side. No other point has been raised.

(3.) In the result this first appeal fails and the same is dismissed.