Aabid Qureshi vs Kundansingh
2023 Latest Caselaw 1012 MP

                              1          M.A. No.4572/2007



IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
            AT JABALPUR
                        BEFORE
     HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GURPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA
              ON THE 17th OF JANUARY, 2023
               MISC. APPEAL No. 4572 of 2007
BETWEEN:-

AABID QURESHI S/O KARIMULLAH,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O WARD NO.14,
WARA SEONI, TEHSIL WARASEONI
DIST.BALAGHAT (MADHYA PRADESH)



                                           .....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI SANJAY JAIN- ADVOCATE )

AND

1.    KUNDANSINGH S/O GAYAN SINGH
      CASTE - RAJPUT, BADKUE R/O TEH.
      AND    DISTRICT    CHHINDWARA
      (MADHYA PRADESH)



2.    RAJESH MIGLANI S/O S.S. MIGLANI,
      AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O
      NARSINGHPUR               ROAD,
      TEH.DIST.CHHINDWARA (MADHYA
      PRADESH)



3.    NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.
      OFFICE NO. 1, 9, MG.ROAD, INDORE
      TAHSIL AND DISTRICT INDORE
      (MADHYA PRADESH)



4.    M.P.     ROAD     TRANSPORT
      CORPORATION,           DEPO
      CHHINDWARA,    TAHSIL   AND
      DISTRICT CHHINDWARA (MADHYA
                                     2                     M.A. No.4572/2007


     PRADESH)



                                                         .....RESPONDENTS
(NONE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2 THOUGH SERVED, SHRI JAYANT
NEEKHRA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.3, SHRI P.K. MISHRA -
ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.4 )
.........................................................................................................

      This appeal coming on for admission this day, the court passed the

following:

                               JUDGMENT

This Miscellaneous Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act has been filed for enhancement against the award dated 28th July, 2007 passed by the Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Waraseoni, District Balaghat in Motor Accident Claim Case No.82/2006.

2. Since the factum of vehicular accident and the injuries has not been disputed, therefore, it is sufficient to mention that the appellant met with a vehicular accident on 16.06.2006 while he was trying to board the offending bus No.M.P.50-9S-9725, as a result, he sustained injuries. It is true that the appellant has not filed any handicap certificate but in paragraph No.11 of the impugned award, the Claims Tribunal has considered the physical condition of the toe of right leg of the appellant and found that some part of his little finger and some part of his leg was amputated and remaining fingers were not having any sensation. The appellant had also suffered injury on his left leg. Although, the Claims Tribunal came to a conclusion that the medical certificate to show the extent of disability has not been filed but looking to the photographs, physical appearance as well as the evidence of the appellant and Dr. M. Samad (P.W.2), it was held that the appellant has suffered grievous injuries

and accordingly, awarded Rs.30,000/- towards permanent disability as well as pain and suffering. An amount of Rs.35,771/- was awarded towards the treatment expenses and it was also held that the appellant had remained bed ridden for a period of four months and therefore, he is entitled for loss of income of four months. Accordingly, the following award was passed:

S.No. Head                                            Amount

1.         Permanent disability and pain suffering    Rs.30,000/-

2.         Treatment expenses                         Rs.35,771/-

3.         Loss of income for four months             Rs.5500/ x 4= 22,000/-

3. It is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that the compensation awarded for suffering the permanent disability and pain and suffering is on a lower side. Looking to the nature of injuries coupled with the fact that his little finger was required to be amputated, the compensation under this head is required to be enhanced. It is further submitted that in fact the appellant had remained out of job for a period of six months and therefore, he is entitled for loss of income for six months instead of four months as awarded by the Claims Tribunal.

4. Per contra, the appeal is vehemently opposed by the counsel for the respondents No.3 and 4. It is submitted that the Claims Tribunal has already adopted a very lenient view because the appellant had not filed any medical document to show the extent of permanent disability sustained by him. However, looking to the personal observation of the Claims tribunal that the little finger of right leg of the appellant is amputated, the counsel for the respondents fairly conceded that the appellant had suffered grievous injury.

5. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered opinion that the award passed by the Claims tribunal is liable to be enhanced and accordingly, the appellant is entitled for following compensation:

    S.No. Head                                               Amount

    1.            Permanent disability and pain suffering    Rs. 1,00,000/-

    2.            Treatment expenses                         Rs.35,771/-

    3.            Loss of income for four months             Rs. 5500x6= 33,000/-

    4.            Total                                      Rs.1,68,771/-

6. Since the Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.87,771/- by way of compensation, therefore, the compensation is enhanced by a further amount of Rs.81,000/-. The other conditions imposed by the Claims tribunal shall remain the same.

7. With aforesaid modification, the award passed by the Claims Tribunal is hereby affirmed.

8. The Appeal succeeds and is hereby allowed.

(G.S. AHLUWALIA) JUDGE Shanu

Digitally signed by SHANU RAIKWAR Date: 2023.01.18 18:36:33 +05'30'