Shri Krishna Verma @ Babbu @ Babalu vs Smt. Swadesh Kumari Batra
2023 Latest Caselaw 7010 MP

                                                          1
                           IN    THE      HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                AT GWALIOR
                                                    BEFORE
                                       HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE SUNITA YADAV
                                                ON THE 1 st OF MAY, 2023
                                              MISC. APPEAL No. 958 of 2006

                          BETWEEN:-
                          SHRI KRISHNA VERMA @ BABBU @ BABALU S/O S/O
                          OMPRAKASH    VERMA , AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
                          OCCUPATION:   BUSINESS, R/O  SITALA   GALI,
                          MANGALESHWAR ROAD, GHANS MANDI, GWALIOR
                          (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                    .....APPELLANT
                          (BY MR. ARUN SHARMA - ADVOCATE)

                          AND
                          1.    SMT. SWADESH KUMARI BATRAW/O SUBHASH
                                BATRA , AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
                                TRUCK OPERATOR,OWNER TRUCK NO.HR38D-
                                4863 R/O 806 CENTRE NO.16, FARIDABAD,
                                HARIYANA (HARYANA)

                          2.    DALVEER SINGH S/O S/O GANGADHAR BARERA
                                OCCUPATION: R/O PAWANDEEP CHOUK DISTT.
                                FARIDABAD HARIYANA (HARYANA)

                          3.    BRANCH     MANAGERTHE     UNITED   INDIA
                                INSURANCE     COMP.     LTD. OCCUPATION:
                                DISTT.FARIDABAD HARIYANA (HARYANA)

                                                                                 .....RESPONDENTS
                          (MR. B.N.MALHOTRA - ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO. 3 -
                          INSURANCE COMPANY)

                                T h is appeal coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
                          following:
                                                        JUDGMENT

Present miscellaneous appeal has been filed against the award dated 22.4.2006 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gwalior in Claim Case Signature Not Verified Signed by: ALOK KUMAR Signing time: 04-May-23 11:59:45 AM

No. 58/2005.

The facts in brief to decide the present appeal are that appellant - claimant filed a claim petition before the learned claims tribunal for grant of compensation on account permanent disability sustained by him in a road traffic accident involving truck bearing registration No. HR38 D 4863.

Respondents No. 1 and 2 - Owner and Driver of the offending vehicle respectively did not file any written statement.

Respondent No. 3 - Insurance Company filed its written statement and submitted that the motorcycle on which the claimant was sitting was being driven by the driver along with two pillion riders due to which the motorcycle

g o t unbalanced resulting in alleged accident. It was further stated that the offending truck was being plied in violation of policy terms and conditions, therefore, insurance company is not liable to pay the compensation.

Learned claims tribunal framed issues and after hearing both the parties o n merits and recording their evidence partly allowed the claim petition and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs.75,000/-.

Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the award passed by learned claims tribunal is on the lower side and the same deserves to be enhanced. Learned claims tribunal has erred in holding that the claimant has no permanent disability on account of injuries caused in this accident. In the light of evidence of Dr. R.S. Bajouria (AW-1), it is clear that the claimant has become disabled and has 68% permanent disability. It is further argued that learned claims tribunal has also calculated other medical expenses on the lesser side and the same be enhanced.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the insurance company supported the impugned award with regard to compensation amount and prayed for Signature Not Verified Signed by: ALOK KUMAR Signing time: 04-May-23 11:59:45 AM

rejection of the appeal.

Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the available record.

The perusal of record reveals that appellant - claimant Shrikrishna Verma has examined Dr. R.S. Bajouria (AW-1). According to this witness, he has issued permanent disability certificate Ex.P-1 on account of the medical examination of the claimant on 29.11.2005. However, in his cross-examination, this witness has admitted that the treatment of the claimant was done by other doctors. He has further admitted that the treatment of claimant was done in government hospital but he issued the certificate on his private capacity. The perusal of Ex.P-1 reveals that it does not have any details of medical examination along with other details in respect to clinical examination, last treatment, etc. In view of the above, learned claims tribunal has not erred in holding that claimant has not suffered permanent disability on account of this accident.

However, considering the nature of the injuries as well as duration of treatment, the compensation as awarded by learned claims tribunal is liable to be enhanced by Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) in lump sum which shall be payable to appellant - claimant in addition to already awarded amount by the claims tribunal i.e. Rs.75,000/-.

The enhanced amount of Rs. 25,000/- shall not carry any interest, however, if the insurance company fails to make the payment of compensation within a period of 12 weeks from the date of filing of certified copy before the Executing Court, then the enhanced amount of award shall carry penal interest at the rate of 6% per annum. Rest of the conditions as imposed by learned

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ALOK KUMAR Signing time: 04-May-23 11:59:45 AM

claims tribunal shall remain intact.

If the enhanced amount of compensation is in excess to the valuation of appeal, the difference of the Court fee (if not already paid) shall be deposited by the appellant - claimant within four weeks' from today and proof thereof shall be submitted before the Registry. Thereafter, Registry shall issue the certified copy of the order passed today.

Appeal stand allowed to the aforesaid extent and disposed of.

(SUNITA YADAV) JUDGE AKS

Signature Not Verified Signed by: ALOK KUMAR Signing time: 04-May-23 11:59:45 AM