SHAILJA TIMOTI Vs. SABHAN KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MID of June 1999 was a period of intensified embitterment, total despondency and gloominess for the claimants-appellants which has further deepened and worsened, for the initial lamentation instead of paving the path of alleviation and attenuation, as it seems, has led to further distress, misfortune, mishap and tribulation. The claimant-appellant, shailja Timoti, could never had dreamt that the exhilaration and jollity which have a base on vivacious animation of youth, the life and soul of life, would melt into a complete disaster annihilating the mirth in entirety, for on 16. 6. 1999 while she was travelling on a Luna to the house of teacher to be tutored at Chhindwara from her village loniakarbal, a lorry bearing registration no. MP 28-B 0324 being rashly and negligently driven by the driver, the respondent No. 1 herein, dashed against her vehicle as a consequence of which, she sustained grievous injuries on the head and various parts of the body and she became unconscious. It is worth noting, she was travelling with the appellant No. 2, Sonali, a young colleen, aged about 15 years. Both victims of the accident were carried to the hospital at Chhindwara and after availing primary treatment they were taken to Nagpur where they availed treatment. Driver who was responsible for the accident was proceeded against in Crime No. 361 of 1999 for the offence punishable under sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal code. Because of the injuries caused by shailja initiated an action under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for brevity 'the Act') before the Motor Accidents claims Tribunal, Chhindwara which formed the subject-matter on M. V. C. No. 80 of 2000 wherein she claimed a sum of Rs. 17,50,000 and Sonali preferred an application for compensation to the tune of Rs. 4,45,000 which was registered as claim Case No. 81 of 2000.

(2.) IT is apposite to note that both the claim petitions were disposed of by Tribunal by a composite award dated 28. 2. 2003 but the appellants have preferred a singular appeal. When the matter was taken up for hearing Mrs. Janhavi Pandit, learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that though two claim petitions were instituted a singular appeal has been filed but keeping in view the concept of beneficent legislation the appeals should be decided on merits more so, keeping in view the peculiar facts of the case and to the strata to which the injured girls belong. We must appreciably note that Mr. Rakesh Jain, the learned counsel for the insurer on whom liability has been fastened fairly conceded that he has no objection if both the claims put forth by the claimants-appellants are decided in this singular appeal. Ergo, we proceed to deal with the appeal treating the same to be an appeal preferred by both the victims of the accident for the purpose of enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

(3.) BE it noted, the factum of accident, the involvement of the vehicle; non-breach of terms and conditions of the policy; and the liability of the insurer to indemnify the injured are not in dispute before us. The only cavil that has emerged for consideration is whether the amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal is just and proper or deserves to be enhanced? That being the position, we shall deal with the injuries sustained by each of the victims separately.