GANPATI PRASAD VERMA Vs. BRUNDABAN BISWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals having arising out of a common judgment and common question of law and fact being involved, on the prayer and consent of the learned counsel for the parties, they are taken up and disposed of by this common judgment. Misc. Appeal No. 412 of 2000 is by the owner of the offending scooter against the award whereas Misc. Appeal No. 473 of 2000 is by the claimant to set aside the award.

(2.) The claimant, appellant in Misc. Appeal No. 473 of 2000 filed a Misc. Case before the 2nd M.A.C.T. (S.D.) Berhampur for compensation of a sum of s. 1,20,000/- for having sustained injuries in course of the accident caused by the respondent-appellant in Misc. Appeal No. 412 of 2000. Short facts are that the claimant was proceeding towards Berhampur University from Mandiapalli by riding a cycle slowly on the left side of the road. The respondent who was the professor of Zoology of Berhampur University was coming from University side towards Fishery College by driving his scooter bearing Registration No. OSG 400 at a very high speed without blowing horn in a rash and negligent manner, for which he could not control the said scooter and suddenly proceeded towards right extremity of the road and dashed against the claimant with violent force. Due to impact, the claimant was knocked down from the cycle and was dragged by the scooter to a considerable distance and sustained severe head injury and other injuries and became unconscious. The claimant was successively treated as M.K.C.G. Medical College Hospital and at S.C.B. Medical College Hospital on reference. It is alleged that due to the accident his left side face became paralysed and disfigured and his left side body became functionless and eye-sight was reduced due to the injury to the eye. After scanning of the skull, the doctor detected that one vein was cut inside the brain and the claimant has to continue treatment throughout his life. A criminal case was also registered for the said accident vide Gopalpur P. S. Case No. 51 of 1994 corresponding to G. R. Case No. 363 of 1994. The vehicle was not insured and as such, the owner of the vehicle was liable for the compensation. It was alleged that the claimant was earning a monthly income of Rs. 2,000/- as a wall painter under a contractor and he had to incur a loan of Rs. 50,000/- towards treatment. The owner of the scooter who was riding the same while the accident took place, in his written statement denied the allegations, inter alia, on the ground that the police investigation reveals that the accident was due to the fault of the claimant, he was not a wall painter under a contractor and has never spent Rs. 50,000/- towards his treatment. It is his specific case that the claimant was riding a bicycle on hire, when he was in a drunken state and hearing the horn of the scooter, the claimant immediately turned his bicycle within a fraction of second and caused the accident. Both the claimant and the driver of the scooter were moving in the same direction that is towards Mandiapali, but not in the opposite direction. The respondent himself arranged one trolley-rickshaw and shifted the claimant to Bhanj Vihar and personally reported the matter to the O.I.C., Bhanj Vihar outpost and then shifted him to M.K.C.G. Medical College Hospital, Berhampur.

(3.) On the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed four issues as below :