LAWS(RAJ)-2014-8-115

KISHNA RAM Vs. BUDHA RAM & ORS.

Decided On August 05, 2014
KISHNA RAM Appellant
V/S
Budha Ram And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant claimant against the judgment cum award dated 23.12.1999 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sojat in M.A.C. Case No. 48/1995, whereby the claim application filed by the appellant under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation to the tune of 7,44,950 for the injuries suffered by him in a road accident was partly allowed and he was awarded compensation to the tune of 80,000.

(2.) Facts in brief are that on 8.9.1994 the appellant was traveling in a Bus No. RPA-7585 which was proceeding from Gudia to Jaitaran. When the bus reached the Aageva Crossing by-pass, another bus bearing Registration No. Rj-19P-1820 coming from the direction of Nimaj being driven in a rash and negligent fashion by its driver collided with Bus No. RPA-7585 in which the appellant and some other persons were traveling. The appellant as well as the other occupants of the bus received injuries in the accident.

(3.) The appellant filed a claim application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act praying for compensation to the tune of 7,44,950 for the injuries suffered by him in the accident. The Tribunal framed usual issues for consideration. It was concluded that the drivers of the two buses involved in the accident drove their respective vehicles in rash and negligent manner and both were held to have contributed equally in causing the accident. The driver, owner and insurer of the Bus No. RJ-19P-1820 and the owners of Bus No. RPA-7585 which was not insured were held jointly and severally responsible to satisfy the award to the extent of 50% each. The findings recorded by the Tribunal on these issues have not been challenged and have thus become final. The Tribunal accepted the claim application filed by the appellant in part and awarded him compensation to the tune of 30,000 as stated above. The only issue which now remains alive for consideration of this Court in the appeal is as to whether the appellant is entitled to any enhancement in the compensation awarded to him.