KAILASH CHAND Vs. HINDUSTAN ENGINEERING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This civil misc. appeal under section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to in short the Act) is directed against the judgment and award dated 9.5.1995 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jaipur city, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) in Motor Accident Case No. 134 of 1989, whereby a sum of Rs. 30,000 has been awarded along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum.

(2.) Briefly stated, the relevant facts are that the appellant Kailash Chand was on " 19.6.1988 talking to Munna Baba near the overhead water tank situated in Jawahar Nagar. A jeep No. RRX 1968, being driven rashly and negligently by its driver, came from Jawahar Nagar bypass road and dashed against him as a result of which he sustained fractures in his left leg and severe injuries on other parts of his body, as a result of which he had to remain admitted in hospital and had to undergo treatment after taking leave from his job. The said jeep belonged to Hindustan Engineering and was insured with Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. At the time of accident appellant was working as helper with Rajasthan State Road Trans. Corpn. on a monthly salary of Rs. 1,260. He filed a claim petition before the Claims Tribunal claiming a total sum of Rs. 3,05,000 as compensation. The claim petition was contested by the registered owner and theinsurance company by filing reply to the claim petition but the Tribunal after framing issues and recording of evidence of the parties and affording an opportunity of hearing to them passed the award on 9.5.1995 holding that the accident occurred due to negligence of the driver of jeep No. RRX 1968 which was owned by respondent No. 1 and insured with respondent No. 2. Aggrieved by the said award, appellant-claimant has filed this appeal for enhancement of the amount of award. No appeal seems to have been filed on behalf of the owner and insurer of the jeep.

(3.) No one is present today on behalf of respondent No. 2 though power has been filed on his behalf by Mr. B.C. Rawat, Advocate and service on respondent No. 1 has been dispensed with.