Tripura High Court
Smt. Tanusree Shil vs Sri Bapan Debnath on 6 January, 2021
Page 1 of 4
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
MAC APP 27 OF 2020
Smt. Tanusree Shil,
wife of Sri Kajal Shil, resident of Jogendranagar,
P.O. Jogendranagar, P.S. East Agartala, District- West Tripura
----Appellant(s)
VERSUS
1. Sri Bapan Debnath,
son of Sri Ratan Debnath, resident of Anandanagar,
P.O. Anandanagar-799004, P.S. Airport, District- West Tripura
(owner of the offending vehicle bearing registration No. TR-01-F-
2249, Auto Rickshaw)
2. The New India Assurance Company Limited,
represented by the Branch Manager, Akhaura Road,
P.O. Agartala-799003, P.S. West Agartala, District- West Tripura
(insurer of the offending vehicle bearing registration No. TR-01-F-
2249, Auto Rickshaw)
----Respondent(s)
For Appellant(s) : Mr. D. Debnath, Advocate
For Respondent(s) : Mr. A. Gan Chowdhury, Advocate
Mr. TK Deb, Advocate
Date of hearing & delivery
of Judgment & Order : 06.01.2021
Whether fit for reporting : No
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH
JUDGMENT(ORAL)
This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act has been
preferred by the claimant-appellant for enhancement of the award dated
08.07.2020 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court No. 2, West
Tripura, Agartala in case No. T.S. (MAC) 24 of 2017.
2. Heard Mr. D. Debnath, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
claimant-appellant. Also heard Mr. A. Gan Chowdhury, learned counsel
appearing for the respondent no.2, insurance company and Mr. TK Deb, learned
counsel appearing for the respondent no.1, owner of the vehicle.
3. The claimant-appellant, Smt. Tanusree Shil met with an accident on
22.10.2015 at 5.30 am and suffered injuries while she was proceeding towards
Motorstand from Ushabazaar by boarding one auto-rickshaw bearing
registration No. TR-01-F-2249. It is the case of the claimant-appellant that
while she along with her husband and son was travelling through that route, the
auto-rickshaw had suddenly dashed an electric pole. Out of such accident, she
suffered severe bleeding injuries and both her legs were broken and she became
senseless. Subsequently, the claimant-appellant was treated at AGMC & GBP
hospital, Agartala. The State Medical Board examined the claimant-appellant
and assessed her disability to the extent of 80% and that disability is permanent
in nature.
4. It is claimed in the claim petition that the said accident occurred due to
the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the auto-rickshaw, as aforesaid. It
is the undisputed fact that the vehicle auto-rickshaw was insured with the New
India Assurance Company Limited i.e. the respondent no. 2 herein. Both the
owner, respondent no.1 and the insurance-company, respondent no.2 had
contested the suit by filing their respective written statement. The insurance-
company did not adduce any evidence. In course of trial, the claimant-appellant
had adduced evidence and exhibited as many as 13 documents.
5. The learned tribunal while deciding the suit had found that the owner of
the vehicle was having all valid documents to ply the said vehicle. Having
considered all material aspects and documents produced before the learned
tribunal, the learned tribunal had awarded Rs. 13,51,356/- as compensation with
interest @ 9% per annum. The award was made under the following heads by
the learned tribunal:-
Sl.No. Heads Calculation
1. Medicines and treatment Rs. 73,956/-
2. Pain and sufferings Rs. 1,00,000/-
3. Conveyance, Special diet and attendant charge Rs. 35,000/-
( Rs. 10,000/- + Rs. 5,000/- + Rs. 15,000/-)
4. Loss of income Rs. 11,42,400/-
5. Total Rs. 13,51,356/-
6. The grievance of the claimant-appellant is that no award has been made
against the future treatment expenses of the claimant-appellant. It is submitted
by the learned counsel for the claimant-appellant that the award of Rs. 1 lakh
against the head of 'pain and suffering' as awarded by the learned tribunal is on
much lower side. Thus, learned counsel for the claimant-appellant has sought
for enhancement of the said award.
7. At my first glance, I agree with the submission of the learned counsel for
the claimant-appellant that the award of Rs. 1 lakh against the head 'pain and
suffering' is on much lower side. According to me, the said award should be
Rs. 5 lakh for the reason that the claimant-appellant had suffered severe
injuries on her both legs for which she became permanently disabled. Due to
the said injuries on legs, the claimant-appellant had to undergo operation on
several occasions, resulting which, the claimant-appellant had suffered severe
pain and suffering for those operations and also at post-operative stage.
8. It is also apparent that no award has been made against future treatment
expenses. Considering the nature of injuries the claimant-appellant had
sustained, I award Rs. 5 lakh, which would be necessary for the claimant-
appellant for incurring future treatment expenses out of her permanent disability
of her legs. I do not find any reason to interfere with the other aspects of the
judgment of the tribunal, instead of the award, I have made here-in-above.
9. Thus, the award is enhanced to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000/- under the head
'pain and suffering' and 'future treatment expenses'. So, the total amount
comes to [Rs. 13,51,356/- + Rs. 10,00,000] = Rs. 23,51,356/-. The New India
Assurance Company Limited is to pay the awarded amount of compensation
alongwith interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim
petition within 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of the copy of the
judgment .
10. In the result, the judgment and award dated 08.07.2020 is interfered with
to the extent as indicated above and the appeal, therefore, stands partly allowed
and thus disposed of.
No order as to costs. Send down the LCRs.
JUDGE
Saikat
