New India Assurance Company ... vs Sri Sajal Pal
2022 Latest Caselaw 1083 Tri

                         Page 1 of 7


                HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                      AGARTALA
                MAC APP NO.37 OF 2021

New India Assurance Company Limited,
Agartala Branch,
P.S- West Agartala,
District- West Tripura, 799001,
(Insurer of the vehicle No.-TR-01-AJ-0740, Maruti India)

                                 ......... Appellant(s)

                Vs.

1. Sri Sajal Pal,
S/o- Sri Sunil Pal,
Of Vill- Gakulpar,
P.S- R.K. Pur,
District- Gomati Tripura
(At present residing at South Ramnagar, P.S.- West
Agartala, District- West Tripura)

2. Sri Haran Debnath,
S/o- Sri Birendra Debnath,
Of Bagabasa, P.S.- R.K. Pur,
District- Gomati Tripura
(Owner of vehicle No.TR.-01-S-1650, Auto)

3. Sri Ashish Chakraborty,
S/o- Lt. Gouranga Chakraborty,
Of Barabhaiya, P.S.- R.K. Pur,
District- Gomati Tripura.
(Driver of vehicle No.TR.-01-S-1650, Auto)

4. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd.
Udaipur Branch, Udaipur,
P.S.- R.K. Pur, District- Gomati Tripura
(Insurer of the vehicle No.TR-01-S-1650, Auto)

5. Sri Debajit Roy,
S/o- Sri Sujit Kumar Roy,
Of South Durgapur, P.S. Kalyanpur,
District- Khowai Tripura,
(Owner of Vehicle No.TR-01-AJ-0740, Maruti India).
                                Page 2 of 7


      6. Sri Kajal Tanti,
      S/o- Sri Chan Tanti,
      Of Durgapur, Shantinagar,
      P.S.- Kalyanpur, District- Khowai Tripura,
      (Driver of Vehicle No.TR-01-AJ-0740, Maruti India).

                                          ....... Respondent(s)

For the Appellant(s) : Mrs. S. Deb(Gupta), Advocate.

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Sankar Bhattacharjee, Advocate.

Mr. B. Majumder, Advocate.

Mr. S. Noatia, Advocate.

Date of hearing and delivery of Judgment & Order : 16.12.2022.

Whether fit for reporting : YES/NO.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE(ACTING)

JUDGMENT AND ORDER(ORAL)

This present appeal has been filed under Section

173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 against the Judgment and

award dated 28.04.2021 passed in T.S.(MAC) 141/2016 by

learned Member of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West

Tripura Agartala (Tribunal No.2).

2. The case of the appellant-Insurance Company is

that the Auto rickshaw, a vehicle bearing registration No.

TR01-S-1650 and Maruti vehicle bearing registration No. TR-

01-AJ-0740 had colluded and being the crime vehicles, the

liability has to be fastened upon both the vehicles. But the

learned Tribunal below has erred in fastening the liability on

the said Maruti vehicle bearing registration No.TR-01-AJ-0740,

which is insured with the appellant-Insurance Company.

3. Apart from the point of fastening the liability,

Mrs. S. Deb(Gupta), learned counsel appearing for the

appellant-Insurance Company further contended that the

amount which has been awarded is excessive and no proper

reasoning is given. When the medical expenses have been

assessed at Rs.3,68,637/- there was no reason for the learned

Tribunal in awarding Rs.4,00,000/- towards this head.

Towards the head of pain and suffering Rs.1,00,000/- was

awarded. Towards the head of traveling expenses,

Rs.1,00,000/- was awarded, and Rs.50,000/- for the cost of

the medical attendant. Rs. 1,00,000/- was awarded towards

the head of future treatment. So, since the said amounts were

awarded without any basis, the learned counsel appearing for

the appellant-Insurance Company pleaded that the impugned

award be set aside and the appeal needs to be allowed. Hence

the present appeal is filed for fastening the liability as well as

on the quantum of the award.

4. Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing

for the claimant-respondent contended that the awarded

amount is just and reasonable and in fact, he could not prefer

a cross objection seeking enhancement since he was not in a

position to contact his client as he was totally bedridden.

Learned counsel further submitted that the awarded amount

be confirmed and the appeal be dismissed.

5. Heard Mrs. S. Deb(Gupta), learned counsel

appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company as well as Mr.

S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel appearing for the claimant-

respondent, and Mr. B. Majumder, learned counsel appearing

for the respondent No.4.

6. A fair reading of the award categorically indicates

that the learned Tribunal below has framed 2(two) issues

which are reproduced here-in-under:-

"I) Whether the claimant sustained injuries in a vehicular accident on 28.09.2013 due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of TR-01-S-1650 and TR-01-AJ-0740?

II) Whether claimant is entitled to compensation, if so, what should be the quantum of the compensation and who shall be held liable for payment the same?"

7. In the said issues with regard to the fastening of

the liability, the learned Tribunal has specifically relied upon

the evidence and the final report filed by the investigating

officer. The investigating officer has categorically stated that

in regard to the manner the accident has taken place, the

liability has been fixed on the crime vehicle which is insured

with the appellant-Insurance Company. With regard to the

fastening of the liability separately upon the 2(two) Insurance

Companies, i.e., the insurer of the said Auto rickshaw

vehicle(TR01-S-1650) and the Maruti Car vehicle(TR-01-AJ-

0740) is concerned, there was no specific issue framed by

Tribunal and the appellant-Insurance Company has not taken

any steps for framing additional issue before the learned

Tribunal below.

8. When the specific issue as contended by the learned

counsel appearing for the appellant-Insurance Company has

not been framed before the learned Tribunal below, and

further the appellant-Insurance Company has not taken any

steps in this regard before the learned Tribunal below, it is

now not open for the appellant-Insurance Company for raising

this new issue which was not before the learned Tribunal

below. This Court is not inclined to go into the said aspect.

9. Now in so far as fixing quantum is concerned, as per

the document i.e., Exbt-No.3, the Doctors have categorically

stated that the claimant- Sri Sajal Pal is suffering from

'Traumatic Paraplegia' (Spinal Injury) and has become

immobile. Thus disability of 80% has been assessed. In view

of the injury to the spine, the claimant became immobile and

cannot perform either skilled or unskilled work. Thus towards

the head of pain and suffering, Rs.1,00,000/- was awarded.

For future medical treatment as suggested by the Doctors in

their medical report another Rs.1,00,000/- was awarded. This

Court feels that the same is just and proper.

10. With regard to Rs.50,000/- awarded towards the

cost of medical attendant, it is needless to say that once the

patient is discharged from the hospital after treatment, he

would immediately incur some additional medical expenses.

The same goes for the attended charges when the patient is

totally bedridden because of his spinal injury. So awarding

Rs.50,000/- for the attended charges is also reasonable.

11. Now with regard to Rs.1,00,000/- awarded

towards the head of traveling expenses, the claimant belongs

to Agartala and has gone out of the State to Kolkata for

getting treatment. Even if it is considered that the claimant

has traveled to Kolkata either by Air or even by way of

Ambulance or Cab, accompanied by some person and

considering that they have travelled frequently during the

course of treatment, even post-discharge from the hospital,

the claimant would have incurred heavy expenditure on travel

in Kolkata. Accident occurred and treatment was done during

the month of September and October that to during Navratri

Durga Puja season when flight fares are very high in Tripura

.Hence the amount awarded towards traveling expenses is

also just and reasonable.

12. With regard to the future prospect, the learned

Tribunal has considered claimant as an unskilled worker and

calculated Rs.6,000/- towards his monthly income when the

claimant stated that his income is Rs.15,000/- per month.

Considering the matter in all aspects as indicated above, the

learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.12,24,000/- under the head

of future prospects. This Court feels that under any of these

heads, the awarded amount is not bonanza and the same is

quite reasonable.

13. In view of the above discussion and observation,

this Court is of the view that the order passed by the learned

Tribunal does not suffer from any irregularity, and hence the

Judgment and Award dated 28.04.2021 is confirmed and the

appeal is dismissed. The appellant-Insurance Company shall

deposit the awarded amount in 1(one) month from today, if

not already deposited. On such deposit, the claimant is at

liberty to withdraw the same unconditionally as per procedure.

14. Consequently, pending application(s), if any, also

stands closed.

CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)

suhanjit