RANVEER SINGH Vs. NAVAL SINGH & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 has been preferred by the claimant/appellant against an Award dated 30th March 2009 in Claim Case No. 130/2008 passed by the First Additional Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior seeking enhancement of the compensation amount for the severe injuries caused in an motor-accident against the respondents, i.e., owner, driver and the Insurance company.

(2.) Undisputed facts of the case are that on 16th March 2007 at public road, near Chaturvedi STD Shop in City Market, at Hindon (Rajasthan), the appellant Ranveer Singh was travelling as a cleaner in a truck bearing registration No. RJ 11 G 0544 from Gwalior to Jaipur. On the spot of accident, the applicant alighted from the truck for purchasing the mineral water, but by that time the driver drove the truck without blowing horn moved the truck. Consequently, the leg of the appellant was crushed under the wheels. The F.I.R. of the incident was lodged and after investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the criminal court. The injured was treated in different hospitals at Jaipur and Gwalior. During treatment, his leg was amputated, just below the knee. It is alleged that at the time of accident, the claimant was working as a cleaner on the truck involved in accident and was getting Rs. 3,000/- p.m. with daily allowances of Rs. 50/- during working days and due to imputation he became paralysed and was compelled to leave his present job. Under these circumstances, the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs. 62,00,000/- was submitted before the learned claims tribunal. After considering the oral and documentary evidence as adduced by the contesting parties, the learned tribunal awarded a sum of Rs 3,35,450/- by way of compensation to the appellant. Being aggrieved, the appellant has filed this appeal, as mentioned above.

(3.) The submission of the counsel for the appellant is that the award passed by the learned MACT for the injuries sustained by the claimant is on lower side, which was based on non-consideration of the necessary aspects such as loss of earning, pain and sufferings etc.