AKHAYA KUMAR SAHOO Vs. CHHABIRANI SETH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A sum of Rupees 70,000/- was claimed as compensation u/S. 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (shortly, 'the Act'). Following the accident in which the claimant was injured by a bus while standing near her house, her left arm had to be amputated. When the accident occurred, the claimant was aged about 15 years and was prosecuting her studies in class X. She had thus a bright prospect in life but due to the accident her expectation even of marriage got belied and she became invalid for life.

(2.) The learned 2nd. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cuttack, on being satisfied about the justifiability of the amount as claimed awarded the same. Out of the awarded amount, a sum of Rs. 50,000 /- was made liable to be paid by the insurer of the vehicle and as to the remaining amount, the owner was made liable. Feeling aggrieved, the owner has preferred this appeal.

(3.) When the appeal was heard by a learned single Judge of this Court, the question which was substantially urged was relating to the liability of the insurer. Reliance was placed by Mr. Basu appearing for the appellant National Insurance Co. v. Krushna Chandra Das, (1989) 2 OLR 120, in which a learned single Judge of this Court held that in a case of the present nature where the accident was caused by a bus, the liability of the insurer qua a pedestrian was not confined to a sum of Rs 50,000 / - of which reference has been made in S. 95(2)(b)(i) of the Act. The learned Judge who heard this appeal could not persuade himself to agree with the aforesaid view and, because of this, desired that the matter may be examined by a larger Bench. It is for this reason that the appeal is before us.