ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. HAMIDA BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. R.D. Mozumdar, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. B. Chakravarty, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

(2.) This is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (M.V. Act ) challenging the award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cachar, Silchar, Assam dated 18.05.2016. The facts stated in brief is that on 17.01.2007, deceased Saukat Ali Barbhuiya, 45 years old transport driver of Assam State Electricity Board (ASEB), while returning from Chaurangi Bazar, at Katogorah met with an accident on National Highway-44, JB road. When he reached Katirail Garage, all of a sudden Maxi-Cab which was going from Chaurangi Bazar hit the back side of the victim. As a result, the victim sustained multiple injuries in the head, chest and other parts of the body. After alarming the people nearby, the injured was shifted to Kalain CHC wherefrom he was referred to SMCH, Silchar. However, he was again shifted to Advance Neuro Science Hospital, Kahilipara road, Guwahati for clotting of blood inside the head and for undergoing further treatment. Thereafter, he was referred to B. Borooah Cancer Institute/Silchar Medical College & Hospital for course of radiotherapy. Thereon, he was shifted to SMCH and Cachar Cancer Hospital and Research Centre, Silchar for undergoing treatment. The treatment continued, however, he died on 23.08.2007. Under the above facts, the dependents of the claimant filed the claim petition against opposite party Nos. 1 to 3. During the trial, the offending vehicle, Tata Sumo, bearing Registration No. AS-11-B-2466 was found to be responsible for the cause of the accident wherein, the deceased Saukat Ali Barbhuiya was grievously injured. The learned Tribunal, on appreciating the evidences came to the conclusion that the deceased should be compensated because there was a casual connection even though not immediate between the accident and the eventual death of the deceased. The victim died after lapse of about 7 (seven) months of the occurrence of the accident. Relying on the judgment passed by our own High Court, the learned Tribunal cited the case of Union of India & Another vs. Bholi Rai, reported in 2012 (3) TAC 546 (Gau) has come to the conclusion that the instant case being similarly situated, the victims cannot be denied of the compensation. He, further ruled that in the case of Bholi Rai (supra), the victim after 3 (three) years of the occurrence of the accident which happened on 17.11.1998 and ultimately died in the year, 2001. In the Death Certificate, the cause of death was shown as "Diabetic CRF with Peripheral failure". But the High Court held that once the claimant/respondent is able to create a high degree of probability on the basis of battery of witnesses that after the deceased met with the accident, he was under prolonged medical treatment and had never resumed duty due to his inability to produce Medical Certificate, the onus of proving that he died due to the combined effect of the injuries sustained by him in the said vehicular accident and his uncontrolled blood sugar, shifts to the appellant. Further, reliance was placed in the case of Bimla Vevi vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation , reported in 2009 ACJ 1725 and Shivaji Dayanu Patil vs. Vatschala Uttam More , reported in 1991 ACJ 777, wherein it was held by the Apex Court that the claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V. Act was merely to establish the case on the stand of preponderance of probability because the standard of proof beyond all reasonable doubt cannot be applied. With the above decision to support the claim of the appellant, the learned Tribunal computed a compensation of Rs. 21,23,444/- to be paid to the claimants by the respondents, i.e. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., who insured the Policy No. 2007/647 in favour of the offending vehicle. Aggrieved by the decision of the learned Tribunal, the appeal petition is before this Court for disposal.

(3.) The appeal petition is mainly focused on the medical evidences to ascertain whether the deceased/claimant died due to the injuries sustained in the accident in question. It is necessary to examine the medical evidence that was laid before the Tribunal for answering this issue. Medical evidence that was placed before the Tribunal are as follows:-