MOHD MUKHATYAR Vs. MIRZA MUKTADEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant (claimant) has filed this appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the award dated 20.8.2004 of the learned Twentieth Member, M.A.C.T., Indore, in Claim Case No. 68 of 2003 on the ground that the amount awarded under section 166 of the said Act is inadequate compared to the harm suffered by the appellant in the accident.

(2.) It is not disputed before us that on the date of the accident the vehicle Tata Sumo bearing registration No. MP 09-SS 3838 was being driven by Mirza Muktadeer, respondent No. 1 and was of the ownership of Immitiaz Sheikh, respondent No. 2. The vehicle was insured with United India Insurance Co. Ltd., respondent No.

(3.) Likewise, the motor cycle bearing registration No. MP 13-JE 129 belonging to the appellant was also insured with respondent No. 4. The case of appellant is that while he was going to Indore on motor cycle on 1.8.2002 at about 10.30 a.m. and he had with him Mohd. Saifi on the pillion, as they reached Sanjay Nagar, an on-coming Tata Sumo bearing registration No. MP 09-SS 3838 driven by the respondent No, 1 approached at an alarming speed and collided with the motor cycle. On account of the collision the appellant sustained a fracture in his right leg with the result his leg had to be amputated from his thigh downwards. On account of the injuries the appellant started feeling sick (giddy) and the giddiness still continues. On account of the said mishap and the resultant injuries, appellant claimed a sum of Rs. 14,65,000. The Tribunal has, however, awarded only Rs. 2,80,000. Aggrieved by the inadequacy of the compensation, the present appeal has been filed. 3. The parties before us have not disputed the extent of injury and further that the accident occurred on account of rashness and negligence of the driver of the vehicle, respondent No. 1. Though the owner and driver had filed written statement, they abandoned the proceedings, they were proceeded ex parte before the Tribunal. Since the insurance company did not have any permission from the Tribunal under section 170 of the Act, the insurance company cannot, even otherwise, assail the findings of the Tribunal on the question of negligence and quantum of compensation.