In this S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal concerning compensation for motor-vehicle accident injuries, the High Court of Rajasthan dismissed the appeal challenging the Tribunal's award of Rs. 2,50,000, finding no ground for enhancement.
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.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 78/2018
Bhagwan Singh S/o Madan Singh, R/o Chota Lamba Post Arai The. Kishangarh Distt. Ajmer. At Present Residing At Delwara Road Beawar.
----Appellant/Claimant
Versus
----Respondents/Non-Claimants
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Jai Prakash Gupta For Respondent no.3 : Ms. Sweey Mishra For Respondent no.2 : Mr. Neeraj K. Tiwari
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Judgment
12/07/2018
Appellant has filed this appeal, challenging the award dated 9.10.2017 passed by the Tribunal, seeking enhancement of compensation amount.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the amount of compensation granted by the Tribunal was on a lower side.
Learned counsel for respondents no.2 & 3, have opposed the appeal.
Appellant had filed the claim petition, seeking compensation on account of injuries suffered by him in the motor-vehicle accident which had occurred on 26.5.1998. Exhibit-5 is the medico legal examination
(2 of 2) [CMA-78/2018]
report of the appellant and as per the same, he had suffered one simple injury and the second injury on his arm was referred for x-ray examination. As per Exhibit-6, appellant had suffered fractures of upper radius and middle humerus. Appellant has failed to prove on record any disability certificate to establish the extent of permanent disability suffered by him. Appellant has proved on record discharge card Exhibit10. The said treatment card has been issued by a private doctor and the doctor who had treated the appellant or had prepared the discharge card has not been examined to establish its genuineness. Accident in the present case had occurred in the year 1998. At that time, minimum wages fixed by the State were Rs.1,144/- per month.
PW-2 Bharat Singh was examined to prove Exhibit-13 salary certificate of the appellant. As per the same, appellant was earning Rs.3,500/- per month plus Rs.30/- per day. The said certificate was issued by Yadav Motors Trailer Corporation. In order to prove the said certificate, appellant had examined PW-2 Bharat Singh. In his crossexamination, the said witness deposed that the appellant was working in the firm before his appointment. He had joined in the year 1996. He deposed that he had not brought the record with regard to the appointment of Bharat Singh with the company. It was the case of PW-2 that Exhibit-13 had been prepared in his presence. However, the said witness had not brought any document to show that he was an employee of Yadav Motors Trailer Corporation.
Tribunal has granted Rs.2,50,000/- by way of compensation to the appellant. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, no ground for enhancement of compensation amount is made out.
Dismissed.
(SABINA)J.
Mohita/21
1 issue framed by the court
Whether compensation awarded by the Tribunal should be enhanced.
Bhagwan Singh S/o Madan Singh
Bharat Singh S/o Shri Prem Singh
Narendra Kumar S/o Shri Bhanwar Lal Yadav
National Insurance Company Ltd.
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
