Hansraj S/O Shri Bajranj Lal Bairwa vs Satyanarayan Chawla S/O Shri Bhorilal
2024 Latest Caselaw 2753 Raj/2

Rajasthan High Court

Hansraj S/O Shri Bajranj Lal Bairwa vs Satyanarayan Chawla S/O Shri Bhorilal on 9 April, 2024

Author: Narendra Singh Dhaddha

Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha

[2024:RJ-JP:16823]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR


            S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 6155/2019


Hansraj S/o Shri Bajranj Lal Bairwa, Aged About 50 Years, R/o
Village Basda Nadi, Tehsil Boli, District Sawaimadhopur Hal
Getor, Jagatpura, Jaipur.
                                                                    ----Appellant
                                    Versus
1.       Satyanarayan Chawla S/o Shri Bhorilal, R/o Makan No.
         285, Shyampuri, Hida Ki Mori, Ramganj, Police Station
         Ramganj, Jaipur. (Driver And Owner Of Vehicle Mini Bus
         No. Gj-12-T-4823)
2.       Shriram General Insurance Company Limited, Through
         Branch Manager Branch Office- E-8, E P I A, Sitapura
         Industrial Area, Jaipur. Policy No. 10003/31/15/299593,
         Validity Date 10.09.2014 To 09.09.2015. (Insurance
         Company Of Vehicle Mini Bus No. Gj-12-T-4823)
                                                                 ----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Bhanu Prakash Verma, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Virendra Agrawal, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Judgment

DATE OF JUDGMENT 09/04/2024

The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles

Act, 1988 has been preferred by the appellant-claimant (for short

'the claimant') dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated

09.10.2019 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No.1.,

Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur (for short 'The Tribunal') in Claim

Petition No.566/2015 (CIS No.01968/15) titled as Hansraj V.

[2024:RJ-JP:16823] (2 of 3) [CMA-6155/2019]

Satyanarayan Chawala and Anr, whereby the Tribunal has awarded

a sum of Rs.1,21,000/- along with interest @ 7% per annum from

the date of filing the claim petition as compensation in favour of

the claimant.

Learned counsel for the claimant submits that Tribunal has

not appreciated the evidence led by the parties and decided the

Issue No.3 against the established principle of law. Learned

counsel for the claimant further submits that claimant had

suffered the fracture of Tibia and Fibula bones but the Tribunal

only granted Rs.50,000/- for mental agony and treatment etc.

Learned counsel for the claimant also submits that he was earning

only Rs.18,000/- per month by working as a Mason. The Tribunal

has not awarded any amount towards loss of income. So, the

judgment and award of the Tribunal may be modified accordingly.

Learned counsel for the Insurance Company has opposed the

arguments advanced by learned counsel for the claimant and also

submitted during the arguments that the Insurance Company

would not recover the amount which has already been paid to the

claimant from respondent No.1.

I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned

counsel for the claimant as well as Insurance Company.

Claimant failed to adduce any evidence regarding permanent

disability. No disability certificate was produced during the

evidence. So, in my considered opinion, the Tribunal rightly

awarded Rs.50,000/- for mental and physical agony, future loss of

income, nutritious diet, transportation etc. and rightly awarded

Rs.71,000/- under the head of treatment. So, the present appeal

[2024:RJ-JP:16823] (3 of 3) [CMA-6155/2019]

being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stand(s)

dismissed accordingly.

It is also made clear that the Insurance Company would not

recover the amount of compensation paid by them from

respondent No.1.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

AVINASH /35

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)