SHANTILAL Vs. MANSINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant-claimant has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, against the award dated 30.7.1997, passed by IIIrd Additional Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dewas, in Claim Case No. 46/1997, by which it awarded a sum of Rs. 16,000/- together with 12% interest from the date of application (18.6.1990) till realisation and costs. The appellant is dissatisfied with the amount, which has been awarded by the Tribunal.

(2.) FOR the proper disposal of this appeal few relevant facts are necessary to be considered. The appellant, who was working as Chief Municipal Officer in Municipality, Sehore and was drawing salary of Rs. 3,200/- p.m., on 19.12.1989 at about 8.30 in the morning came on Dewas bus stand to catch a bus for Sehore. He was standing on the bus stand, then a bus bearing No. CHI-7864, belonging to respondent No. 2 Corporation and being driven by respondent No. 1 Mansingh, came on the bus stand. As soon as the bus stopped, the passengers started boarding on it. When the appellant was boarding the bus along with his luggage the respondent No. 1 driver, without any intimation, alarm or blowing horn, started the bus on reverse side. The appellant claimant, who was standing on the door fell down and his right leg came under the wheel of the bus and the same was raptured. Thereafter, the claimant was taken to Prabhu Prasad Hospital of Dr. D.P. Shrivastava, where he was admitted for treatment. Report of the incident was also lodged in Kotwali, Dewas on the same day.

(3.) AFTER appreciating the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal found that on 19.12.1989 accident in question had taken place from the aforesaid bus and it was also found that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the bus by its driver and it was also found proved that the appellant fell down from the bus and sustained various injuries. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 16,000/-, towards compensation, on the ground that the petitioner had failed to prove the disablement. Hence, this appeal has been preferred for enhancement of the amount of compensation.