ANOWARA BEGUM Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been filed against the judgment and award dated 30.5.1996 passed by the Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sonitpur at Tezpur in the M.A.C. Case No. 4 of 1992. By the impugned award a total amount of Rs. 50,000 was awarded and the opposite party No. 2 Md. Ali Hazarika was directed to pay the awarded amount of Rs. 50,000 with 12 per cent interest per annum from the date of the claim petition till realisation.

(2.) THE brief facts are as follows: On 30.8.91 at about 12 a.m. the claimant Md. Ibrahim Ali (now dead and substituted by heirs) parked his scooter in front of a 'pan' shop. Meanwhile a vehicle suddenly came from Tezpur side with passengers. The vehicle was driven in a most rash and negligent manner at an exceedingly high speed and while it reached near Panchmile Tiniali at the turning point, the driver of the vehicle could not control the bus and it capsized causing several grievous and multiple injuries to the claimant and to the passengers of the said vehicle. As a result of the accident, the left pelvis bone and right iliac bone of the claimant were fractured and he had to undergo treatment at Civil Hospital, Tezpur and had to incur heavy expenses for medical treatment. His scooter was also completely damaged. The claimant has been completely disabled and is not in a position to do his normal duty. Accordingly a claim petition was filed claiming Rs. 1,00,000.

(3.) IN support of the case, the claimant -petitioner examined four witnesses including himself, the O.P. examined no witness. In deciding issue No. 3 the learned Tribunal found that because of the injury suffered, his disability which is approximately 75 per cent and his left leg was also shortened. It was found by the Tribunal that because of injury he became permanently disabled and his disability extended to 75 per cent. Thereafter, the learned Judge in issue No. 3 considered the claim of the injured and assessed the damage/compensation at Rs. 50,000. Regarding issue No. 4 the learned Tribunal without any evidence before it came to the finding that Dharani Dhar Deka did not have driving licence and as such the insurance company cannot be fastened with the liability to pay compensation. If the insurance company wanted to establish this plea, it was its burden to establish the same and without doing so, the Tribunal came to a finding that the driver did not have a driving licence. As such this appeal is for enhancement of the compensation as well as for an award against the insurance company.