Dismissed

Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Sri Balbir Singh and Another

Uttarakhand HC2 May 2013AO/66/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Uttarakhand dismissed the appeal filed by the Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal's award of compensation to a claimant injured in a road accident. The court found no illegality in the Tribunal's finding regarding the driver's negligence and the calculation of compensation, setting the matter to a summary dismissal.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed summarily; statutory deposit transmitted to the Tribunal.

Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation Vs… — Motor Accident Claims | Uttarakhand HC (2013)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

¶3

Appeal From Order No. 66 of 2013

¶4

Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, through its Regional Manager Saharanpur Depot Saharanpur

¶5

…................Appellant.

¶6

Versus

¶7

Sri Balbir Singh

¶8

S/o Savan Singh @ Sohan Singh

¶9

R/o Village Lakkadghat Khadri

¶10

Ladakmaf Pargana Parwadun

¶11

Tehsil/District Dehradun

¶12

Shri Shiv Charan Lal

¶13

S/o Ram Khiladi

¶14

R/o Police Station Gorai, Egglas,

¶15

District Aligarh U.P. (Driver of Bus)

¶16

The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Head Office First 8

¶17

Balmiki Marg Lucknow, U.P.

¶18

…............Claimants/Respondents

¶19

Shri Abhishek Verma, Advocate, holding brief of Shri Ramji Srivastava, Advocate, present for the appellant.

¶20

Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J.

¶21

Heard.

¶22

¶23

(2) This appeal is directed against award dated 25.10.2012, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Ist Additional District Judge, Rishikesh, in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 144 of 2006 whereby the Tribunal has awarded ` 4,31, 790/with 6 % interest per annum as compensation to the claimant (injured).

¶24

(3) Brief facts of the case are that on 20.12.2003, at about 6.30 pm claimant Balbir Singh was going on a motor cycle bearing Registration No. UA07 C558 from Hardwar to Rishikesh. Near Nepali Farm a bus bearing Registration No. UP15P 9946 belonging to Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (appellant) which was allegedly being driven rashly and negligently by its driver dashed at the motor cycle while coming from the opposite direction. In the accident claimant Balbir Singh and the pillion rider Arun suffered injuries. Claimant Balbir Singh was taken for medical treatment to C.M.I Hospital, Dehradun, from there, he was referred to P.G. Medical College, Chandigarh, and his leg was amputated consequently he became permanently disabled. He (Balbir Singh) was 26

¶25

¶26

years aged person who was said to be earning ` 4,000/- as a supervisor of a contractor.

¶27

(4) The plea of the appellant before the Tribunal was that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the appellant's bus. It was also pleaded that the bus was insured with Oriental Insurance Company (present respondent no.3).

¶28

(5) However, the Tribunal after discussing the evidence on record, found that the insurance policy paper disclosed that the bus bearing Registration No. UP15P 9946 belonging to appellant was insured for the period 16.08.2004 to 15.08.2005, while the accident had already taken place on 20.12.2003. As such, the insurance company was held not liable to pay the compensation.

¶29

(6) As far as, the quantum of the compensation is concerned, the Tribunal has assessed the notional income of the injured at ` 36,000/- per annum and considering that his age was 26, multiplier of 17 has been applied. The disability has been treated as 60 % as proved on the record

¶30

¶31

from the certificate paper No. 105B issued by the Chief Medical Officer and accordingly financial loss has been assessed at 60 % of the notional income. The Tribunal has awarded only ` 22,590/towards the medical treatment for which the injured produced the documentary evidence. Rest of the amount was given towards nutrition loss of income due to hospitalization etc. The interest has also been awarded at 6% per annum which is quite reasonable.

¶32

(7) In the above circumstances, this Court finds that there is no illegality in the impugned award. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed summarily. The statutory deposit made by the appellant before this Court be transmitted to the Tribunal concerned.

¶33

(Prafulla C. Pant, J.)

¶34

¶35

Dt.02.05.2013

Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Sri Balbir Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Sri Balbir Singh and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pal Singh and Ors. Vs Karam Singh Negi and Ors.

Smt. Naseema Begum Vs Chote Ram

Shoorveer Singh Vs Hira Singh and Others

Munshi Mewa Lal Vs State of Uttarakhand

Swami Shashwatanand Vs Anil Kumar Ghosh and Ors.

New India Assurance Company Limited Vs Narendra Mohan Nayal and Others