Mujjafar Ali vs Roop Chand And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 1842 Raj/2

Rajasthan High Court

Mujjafar Ali vs Roop Chand And Another on 15 March, 2024

Author: Narendra Singh Dhaddha

Bench: Narendra Singh Dhaddha

[2024:RJ-JP:12948]

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

            S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 3827/2012

Mujjafar Ali S/o Mahbub Ali, By Caste Musalman, R/o Village
Talera Tehsil And Distt. Bundi
                                                                    ----Appellant
                                    Versus
1.       Roop Chand S/o Bhanwar Lal By Caste Brahman, R/o
         Jawahar Nagar, Bundi Through Chief Agar Manager,
         Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation Bundi Driver
2.       Chief Agar, Manager Rajasthan State Road Transport
         Corporation, Bundi Owner
                                                                 ----Respondents

For Appellant(s)          :     Mr. Sunil Jain, Adv.
For Respondent(s)         :     None present

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Judgment

DATE OF JUDGMENT 15/03/2024

The present appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles

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

'the claimant') against the judgment and award dated 19.06.2012

passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bundi (for short

'the Tribunal') in Claim Case No.516/2008 titled as "Mujjafar Ali

Vs. Roop Chand and Anr." whereby the Tribunal has awarded a

sum of Rs.72,227/- along with interest @ 6% per annum to be

paid 12.12.2008 as compensation in favour of the claimant.

Learned counsel for the claimant submits that the Tribunal

has committed an error in not considering the disability certificate

filed by the claimant. Learned counsel for the claimant further

submits that as per disability certificate, the claimant suffered

[2024:RJ-JP:12948] (2 of 2) [CMA-3827/2012]

15% permanent disability but the Tribunal has not considered the

loss of income on account of disability as suffered by him. The

Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the head of future

prospects. So, judgment of the Tribunal be modified accordingly.

Despite service of notice, none has put in appearance on

behalf of respondent No. 2.

I have considered the arguments advanced by learned

counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned order.

It is an admitted position that the claimant was a

Government Servant and he did not suffer any monetary loss on

account of said disability. Even he did not produce the Doctor in

evidence to prove the disability certificate. Thus, the Tribunal has

rightly rejected the claim under the head of loss of income as well

as future prospects. Since, 15% disability was not in relation to

the whole body, the Tribunal has rightly awarded Rs. 40,000/- for

such disability. So, the appeal filed by the claimant being, devoid

of merit, is liable be dismissed which stand dismissed accordingly.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

Gourav/Tahir/248

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)