In a first appeal against a motor accident compensation award, the court held that contributory negligence of drivers does not affect a third-party passenger's claim. The awarded compensation was accepted as appropriate without interference.
The appeal was dismissed, and the claims tribunal award was upheld.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 1
Case :- FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDER No. - 82 of 2021
Appellant :- Uttrakhand Parivahan Nigam Respondent :- Balkeerat Singh And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Rahul Anand Gaur
Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.
Sri Rahul Anand Gaur, learned counsel for the appellant.
This appeal has been filed by Uttrakhand Privahan Nigam being aggrieved of award dated 26.10.2020 passed by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Rampur in MACP No. 152 of 2016 on the ground that X-Ray and CT Scan were not produced on record. Secondly when accident took place then both the drivers of the Car bearing registration no. UP 14 AS 3081 and that of Bus bearing registration No. UK-04-PA/0217 had a head on collision and therefore factum of contributory negligence should have been accepted and dealt with by the learned Claims Tribunal.
After hearing counsel for the appellant and going through the available record filed with the memo of appeal, it is apparent that claimant Balkeerat Singh is aged about 12 years. It is not a case of the appellant that boy was driving a car in relation to which contributory negligence has been attributed by the counsel for the appellant.
As passenger status of claimant is that of third party, therefore, even if a finding of contributory negligence is recorded in favour of the present appellant then also, that will not affect the claims put forth by the claimant who was admittedly a passenger in the car, thus a third party.
As far as factum of injuries are concerned, Tribunal has considered them and has narrated that as per medical report document N8/C/3 issued by S.B.B.P. Community Centre, Icchha, where injured were admitted at 1:50 pm on 1.3.2016. Following injuries were recorded :
(i) Injury of face and left eye and forehead, half head which were bleeding,
(iii) Injury of left leg with fracture in left leg.
There is no evidence to contrary to dispute these injuries.
The Tribunal has awarded as sum of Rs. 1,84,788/- out of which 1,74,788/- is towards expenses incurred as treatment of the claimant. Only a sum of Rs. 10,000/- has been awarded under the head of pain and sufferings which can not be said to be excessive, therefore, taking into consideration total facts and circumstances of the case, the amount awarded does not call for any interference by this Court. The appeal fails and is dismissed.
If any amount under Section 173 has been deposited, then that be remitted to the learned claims tribunal to be adjusted against the amount to be disbursed in favour of the claimants or for refund, as the case may be.
Order Date :- 2.2.2021 S.K.S.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether X-Ray and CT Scan non-production warrants interference with tribunal award.
Whether contributory negligence of drivers affects compensation for third party passenger.
Whether the quantum of compensation awarded calls for judicial interference.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Uttarakhand Parivahan Nigam
Balkeerat Singh And 2 Others
Vivek Agarwal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
