LAWS(ORI)-2004-1-32

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Vs. BHRAMARA BAG

Decided On January 13, 2004
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD Appellant
V/S
Bhramara Bag Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed invoking the jurisdiction under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, challenging the award dated 17th March, 1994 passed by the 2nd M.A.C.T. (Northern Division), Sambalpur in Misc. (A) Case No. 297 of 1990(S) awarding a compensation of Rs. 62,000/ - with interest thereon from the date of claim to claimant - respondent No.l.

(2.) BEREFT of unnecessary details, the short facts of thecase as alleged in the claim petition are that the petitionerwho was a poor rickshaw puller met with an accident on 17.7.1990at 6.30 P.M. near Dhanupali Chhak, Sambalpur. At the timeof accident, he was moving on foot on the left side of NationalHighway No. 42. The offending jeep bearing registration No.DHE -9341 coming in high speed and being driven in rash andnegligent manner, dashed against the applicant from his backsideas a result of which he sustained injuries including fracturein the right leg. On the basis of a petition filed by him, Misc.(A) Case No. 297 of 1990 was registered in the Court of 2ndM.A.C.T. (Northern Division), Sambalpur.

(3.) IN order to substantiate the case, the claimant examinedthree witnesses including himself and exhibited nine documents,such as F.I.R., Zimanama, Charge -sheet, Injury Report, Dischargecertificate, prescriptions, cash memos, bank pass book andinsurance certificate. P.W.I was the doctor, P.W.2 was theclaimant himself, and P.W.3 was an occurrence witness, whosupported the claimant's case. P.W.2 has given evidence supporting the averments made taken by him in the claim petition. The statements of P.W.2 have been corroborated by P.W.3. According to P.W. 1, the doctor, who treated the claimant, there was dislocation of right ankle joint, fracture of Calcaneum and fracture of fifth metatarsal. P.W. 1 further deposed that the claimant was admitted in a Nursing Home where he remained as an indoor patient for three days. The injury report was duly proved by him. The doctor categorically stated that the injured -claimant cannot pull a rickshaw since there was partial disability of the right leg.