VARUN SINGH Vs. ARVIND KUMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question involved for consideration in the present appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, is as to how much amount would construe "just compensation" for the injuries suffered by the 16 years old school boy, who was hit by a tanker causing him 60% permanent disability to his right leg?

(2.) The facts emerging from the record are that on 17.11.1994 at about 4.00 PM appellant-claimant Varun Singh, a student of class 9th in Government Intermediate College, Pratapgarh, while was returning house from school on bicycle, was hit from behind on account of rash and negligent driving of tanker bearing registration no. UP44-3277. It is claimed that people present on the spot forced the driver of the tanker to stop immediately. The driver left the tanker at the spot and ran away, and the tanker was taken in police custody. In the accident, appellant-claimant's right leg came in between tyre of the tanker, causing multiple fracture between hip bone and knees, and also between knees and toes, apart from severely rapturing muscles etc. Appellant-claimant suffered severe pain and discomfort due to the injury caused. He was taken to the hospital at Pratapgarh, where he was attended by the doctors available on emergency, who found injuries to be serious and referred him to SRN Hospital and Medical College, at Allahabad. The appellant-claimant was hospitalized and various operations were performed. However, as the treatment offered was not successful, he was referred to SGPGI Lucknow and thereafter to Bombay, where he was examined by Dr. Jhunjunwala, Dr. Pradhan, Dr. Patel, Dr. Dholakiya and doctors of All India Physical Injury and Rehabilitation Centre of the Government of India, where also he remained admitted for treatment and operations were performed again. The period of intensive care by the doctors including hospitalization stretched to about 7 months, which was followed with treatment as outdoor patient for about a year and half. Appellant-claimant's right leg was shortened, he could move only on clutches and thus suffered permanent disability of 60% to his right leg.

(3.) In the claim instituted for compensation, before the tribunal, the owner of the vehicle and the insurance company disputed the involvement of the vehicle itself. The tribunal considered the respective pleas of the parties and after considering the evidence brought on record came to the conclusion that accident was caused by the vehicle. Relevant circumstances/facts were noticed i.e. the vehicle itself at the spot was seized and taken in custody by the police; in the criminal proceedings involvement of the vehicle was found proved apart from oral evidence categorically giving details of vehicle in question. Tribunal, therefore, returned finding that the accident was caused by the vehicle in question, which was insured with National Insurance Company Ltd. The findings of the tribunal returned on this count have not been questioned by the owner or the insurance company and, therefore, the involvement of the vehicle in question in the accident has attained finality and requires no further consideration on this aspect.