ivil Appeal No 1188 of 1977
From the Judgment and Order dated 7121976 of the Allahabad 3 High Court in FAO No 444 of 1975
AND Special Leave Petition C No 5344 of 1977
From the Judgment and Order dated 7121976 of the Allahabad High Court in FA FO No 458 of 1975
Praveen Swarup Pramod Swarup BD Sharma Smt
Sushma Suri and Jitender Sharma for the appearing parties
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PUNCHHI J
This appeal and special leave petition are cross cases in nature and are directed against the judgment and order dated December 7 1976 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Allahabad At Allahabad in FAO No 444 of 1976
The facts established before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Bulandshahr and re oriented before the High Court were that Randhir Singh while driving a tempo on October 10 1972 on a road leading from Bulandshahr to Sikandrabad was hit head on by a speeded truck owned by Ramesh Chandra as a result of which his tempo was thrown into a nearby ditch whereby he sustained injuries on both his legs and his several bones were fractured as well
This was followed by lodging of a report at Police Station Sikandrabad and putting the injured at District Hospital Bulandshahr where from he was removed to Safdarjung Hospital New Delhi for final treatment
The permanent result was that a part of the right foot of Randhir Singh had to be amputated as his toes had become gangrenous
Randhir Singh moved the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Bulandshahr seeking damages to the tune of Rs1 lakh
The contestants being Ramesh Chandra the owner of the truck its driver and the Insurance Company took various defences to negative the claim
The matter was focussed by the issues framed
The Tribunal by an elaborate and well reasoned order fixed negligence on the truck driver and held the injured entitled to compensation
In the measurement thereof the Tribunal took note of the age of the claimant to be 22 years and his expected income as a driver of a motor vehicle at a minimum rate of Rs300 pm expected to be earned for at least 22 years in the coming
The figure thus arrived was at Rs79200 and that 4 being lumpsum payment determined a sum of Rs55000 to be adequate compensation for the permanent disability suffered by the claimant
Besides the Tribunal granted Rs3000 on account of expenses of treatment
Under the head of general damages for pain suffering and loss of enjoyment of life the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs20000 as compensation
Thus a total award of Rs78000 was made in favour of the claimant
Rs50000 was ordered to be paid by the Insurance Company as its liability was found to be limited to that extent
The remaining Rs28000 was ordered to be paid by the owner
The claimant also got 34th of his costs
Three separate appeals were filed before the High Court one by the dissatisfied claimant the second by the ag grieved truck owner and the third by the aggrieved Insurance Company
The High Court dealt with the matter in equal elaboration
It affirmed the view of the Tribunal in grant ing compensation under the three heads aforementioned
However the award was improved to the extent that the claimant also got interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum on the amount of compensation from 11111972 the date on which the claim petition was filed upto the date of the payment thereof subject of course to suitable adjust ments in the event of any payment having already been made to the claimant
In Civil Appeal No 1188 of 1977 preferred by the owner of the truck leave was granted limited to grounds II  XIX of the Special Leave Petition
In Ground No II the question raised was that when the claimant had not claimed interest in the application and the Tribunal had not awarded any the High Court was in error in granting interest under Section 110 CC of the where the power of the Court of the Tribunal was discretionary
In Ground No XIX the question raised was that a sum of Rs20000 on account of mental agony pain and suffering etc
was arbi trarily granted and thus ought to have been taken to be covered up by the compensation granted on account of loss of earning
In Special Leave Petition No 5344 of 1977 the claimant has asked for more compensation interest etc on each count
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the appeal papers in particular regard of the limited nature of appeal of the truck owner
Section 110 CC as it stood on the date of the accident provided that where any Court or Claims Tribunal allows a claim for compensation made under the Act such Court or Tribunal may direct that in addition to the amount of compensation simple 5 interest shall also be paid at such rate and from such date not earlier than the date of making the claim as it may specify in this behalf
The caption of the provision is Award of interest where any claim is allowed
The question of award of interest is dependent on the claim being al lowed
Should the claim be not allowed the question of grant of interest would not arise and if awardable it is in addition to the amount of compensation
The Court of Tribunal in these circumstances should determine in the first instance claim for compensation and in the event of its being allowed can further exercise the discretion to grant simple interest in terms thereof but as an additive to the amount of compensation
So the addition of interest to the compensation by judicial discretion is sequential in the eye of law and no claim in that regard in our view specifically need be laid in so many words in the claim petition
The grant of interest in our view is not depend ent on any pleading in that regard and can even be orally asked if the contingency arises
Thus in our view there is no substance in Ground No II of the Special Leave Petition and the attack to the grant of interest is negatived
With regard to Ground No XIX covering the question that the sum awarded for pain suffering and loss of enjoyment of life etc
termed as general damages should be taken to be covered by damages granted for loss of earnings is concerned that too is mis placed and without any basis
The pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life which is a resultant and permanent fact occasioned by the nature of injuries received by the claimant and the ordeal he had to undergo
If money be any solace the grant of Rs20000 to the claim ant represents that solace
Money solace is the answer discovered by the Law of Torts
No substitute has yet been found to replace the element of money
This on the face of it appeals to us as a distinct head quite apart from the inability to earn livelihood on the basis of incapacity or disability which is quite different
The incapacity or disability to earn a livelihood would have to be viewed not only in presenti but in futuro on reasonable expectancies and taking into account deprival of earnings of a conceiva ble period
 This head being totally different cannot in our view overlap the grant of compensation under the head of pain suffering and loss of enjoyment of life
One head relates to the impairment of a person s capacity to earn the other relates to the pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life by the person himself
For these reasons we are of the considered view that the contentions raised by the truck owner appellant in that behalf must be negatived and we hereby negative them
6 With regard to further enhancement of compensation and further enhancement of interest as claimed in the special leave petition by the claimant we find in the facts and circumstances of this case no scope in that regard
As a result of the afore discussion both these matters are without merit and are accordingly dismissed
Parties to bear their own costs
NPV Appeals dis missed


Summary:
This appeal has been preferred by the State against an order of acquittal recorded by the High Court in respect of the accused respondent
According to the prosecution there were two rival factions in village Deotaha UP one led by the accused respondents and the other by the deceased victims
There existed bitter enimity between the two fac tions one faction was out to take the blood of another and due to this deep rooted animosity Accused 1 2 and 27 hatched a conspiracy with some other associates to murder Prabhu Nath and his men on 141
on which date they were scheduled to cut the standing sugar cane in Plot Nos 736 and 737
It is alleged by the prosecution that in pursu ance of this conspiracy Accused 3 deposited his licensed gun with the arms dealer on 1211974 with a view to screen himself from any prospective accusation and Accused 1 2 and 27 in order to set up a plea of alibi connived with Accused 40 Travelling Ticket Examiner in the Railways traveled without ticket got themselves checked and sentenced to imprisonment by the railway magistrate on 1311974 and were incarcerated in the Gorakhpur jail till 1811974
According to the prosecution on 1411974 when the deceased 13 per sons and others went for cutting the sugar cane crops raised by one of the deceased
At about 1 pm by which time the cut crop was being loaded in the tractor trolley brought by the deceased persons Accused persons with their men 80 to 90 in number attacked them with spears lathes and pharsas and started firing indiscriminately
The deceased persons and others ran with a view to save their lives some hid themselves behind the tractor and trolley and others ran towards north and south directions
As a result of the attack PWs 3 and 24 received injuries and 13 persons suc cumbed to their injuries instantaneously
It is alleged by the prosecution that during the course of the occurrence the deceased Prabhu 940 Nath who had a gun rued at the accused party in self defence and injured Accused 36 Rambali
Thereafter Accused 10 and 16 covered the dead bodies with sugar cane leaves and sprin kled diesel oil by taking it from the tractor and set fire to the bodies
Thereafter the accused left the scene of occurrence accused 32 carried away the gun of the deceased Prabhu Nath
PW 1 thereupon lodged the FIR and the police took up the investigation
After completing the investigation PW 38 laid the chargesheet in 4 batches which gave rise to 4 different sessions trials which were disposed of by a common judgment by the Sessions Judge
All the accused pleaded not guilty and denied their complicity with the offence
Accused 36 Rambali admitted his presence and stated that the sugar cane belonged to one Phunni and not to Tirjugi and his men and while Phunni and his men were cutting the crops the deceased Prabhu Nath and other de ceased persons attempted to forcibly take away the crops and during the course of such attempt Phunni and his men at tacked the deceased party and that he was shot by the de ceased Prabhu Nath when he entreated that the sugar cane should not be taken away
Accused 1 2 and 27 denied the charge of conspiracy contending that they were in prison on the date of occurrence consequent upon their conviction by the railway magistrate
The learned Sessions Judge acquitted 25 accused persons out of the total of 41 accused viz 4 6 11 14 17 22 24 26 28 32 35 and 39 41 finding them not guilty of any of the charges and convicted the remaining 16 accused for various offences and passed sentences of the prisonment in respect of each accused
It may be mentioned that Accused Nos 10 and 16 were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and each of them was sentenced to death besides their convic tion under Section 307 IPC
All the convicted accused filed Criminal appeals in the High Court
The reference made by the Trial Court for con firmation of the sentence of death imposed on A I0 and A 16 was heard as Referred Case No 31 of 1976
The State pre ferred appeal under Section 378 Cr
PC against the acquit tal of all the 24 acquitted persons
In the case of A 40 the High Court did not grant leave as required under Section 3783 Cr
The High Court disposed of all the appeals inclusive of the State Appeal and the Referred Case by the common judgment whereby all the criminal appeals preferred by the convicted accused except the appeal preferred by Rambali A 36 was allowed and their sentences were set aside
The State Appeal was dismissed and the referred case in view of the acquittal of the accused was rejected
Hence this 941 appeal by the State
The contention of the State is that the acquittal of the accused is not proper and unwarranted on the basis of the evidence led in the case
Dismissing the appeals this Court HELD When viewed from any angle the reasons assigned by the High Court for disbelieving the testimony of all the ocular witnesses are not unreasonable
The evidence is ambulatory and vasulating besides suffering from insurmount able infirmities and improbabilities
The totality of the evidence is unworthy of the credence when examined by the standard of yardsticks of credibility
956G There is a deliberate false implication of the Accused 1 2 and 27 to whom overtacts are attributed in exhibit Ka 1
In fact the High Court has gone in great depth into the facts and circumstances of the case and rightly concluded that the prosecution has miserably failed in establishing the guilt of the accused except A 36
956H 957A Suspicion by itself however strong it may be is not sufficient to take the place of legal proof and warrant a finding of guilt of these three accused
957C The entire evidence is nothing but a coloured version with concocted story and exaggerated account mixed with falsehood and that the prosecution has miserably failed to make out the charges against all or any of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt except Rambali A 36 who him self admitted his presence at the scene
957H 958A No doubt it is true that this heinous offence is diabol ical in conception and executed in gruesome and ghastly manner
It is shocking that 13 persons have been done away with in a broad day light in the course of the same transac tion
Nonetheless the Court when satisfied that the evidence adduced by the prosecution is not only unworthy of credence but also manifestly and inextricably mixed up with falsehood cannot be carried away merely on the fact of multiplicity of victims and on the bias of speculations and suppositions in the confused stream of facts
The High Court has apprised the evidence in the proper perspective and arrived at a correct conclusion which is neither perverse nor unreasona ble
958D E Balaka Singh  Ors
vs State of Punjab   referred to 942