LAWS(MPH)-1992-5-19

BALWANT SINGH Vs. SARDUL SINGH

Decided On May 15, 1992
BALWANT SINGH Appellant
V/S
SARDUL SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the claimant is directed against the award passed by the Motor Vehicles Accidents Claims Tribunal, Gwalior on 26.11.1990.

(2.) THE facts may be narrated briefly. While the claimant/appellant on 1.8.87, at about 1.00 p.m. riding on a cycle was proceeding towards Dabra on his left side of the road, the truck No.C.P.H. 7034, owned by respondent No.1 coming from opposite direction, being driven rashly, negligently, by approaching on the wrong side dashed against the cycle causing injuries to the claimant/appellant on his both legs, and the right hand. Resultantly, his right thigh suffered the fracture of femur and tibia and also fibula of the left leg. Alna bone of the right hand was also fractured. The said truck did not stop and was driven away from the spot. The report of the accident was lodged with P.S. Dabra, and the appellant was taken to Dabra Hospital where from he was removed to a private nursing home, where his both the legs and the right hand were put under plaster, and the appellant was confined to bed. Even after the treatment his one leg has gone short by 5 c.m.

(3.) THE serious challenge is made to the findings of the learned Tribunal particularly with regard to the assessment of the loss of earning, due to the permanent disability of the appellant, which has been calculated at Rs.75/ -p.m. and also to the 12% awarded rate of interest. The counsel for respondents supported the award submitting that the loss of earning of the appellant was rightly assessed at Rs.75/ - per month, and the rate of interest being reasonable required no interference. There is no clear finding of the learned Tribunal about the monthly income of the appellant, whereas from the evidence of the appellant and his witnesses the fact was amply proved that he was earning Rs.500/ -p.m. The claimant has the life before him and on obtaining majority even if he worked as casual labour the minimum amount that he could earn could in no case be less than Rs.500/p.m. with the present price rise and the inflation the amount of Rs.500/ - is a meagre amount through which one can hardly bring the two ends together.