1 IN THE HGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.869/2010 (Ganesha Ram Vs. Jagdish Kumar & Ors.) Date of Order : 10.11.2010 P R E S E N T HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr. Bharat Shrimali, for the appellant. In the instant misc. appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the appellant is challenging the judgment and award dated 14.05.2010 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bali Camp Sumerpur in M.A.C. Case No.5/2005 and prayed that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal may be enhanced. According to the facts of the case, on 16.8.2004, the appellant met with an accident when he was going to Pushkar from Khiwada by jeep bearing No.RJ-16-T-412, which was driven by Ganesha Ram (appellant himself). In between the way, near Panch Mukhi Balaji bridge, one tanker bearing No. RJ-IG-7658 hit the jeep and the driver of the said tanker was driving the said vehicle rashly and negligently due to which the jeep fell down under the bridge and some passengers received injuries and two 2 passengers namely Jeet Mal and Mathura died on spot. For the aforesaid occurrence, a FIR bearing No.149/2004 was registered under Sections 279, 337 and 304-A I.P.C. upon the statement made by the injured Narayan, who was under the treatment in the Hospital. In the said accident, the appellant received seven injuries, out of which two were grievous in nature, therefore, the appellant filed a claim petition for compensation of Rs.17,70,000/-. In the claim petition, the learned Tribunal after adjudication passed award of Rs.68,500/- in different heads with interest @ 6% per annum. The appellant has preferred this misc. appeal and raised two grounds that the amount awarded in favor of the claimant is not proper and he is entitled for more compensation in different heads and interest is also wrongly awarded @ 6% per annum. Learned Tribunal ought to have awarded interest @ 9% as per present rate. It is also pointed out that the tribunal has committed an error while granting interest from the date of judgment and not from the date of filing claim petition. Therefore, the interest @ 9% may be awarded from the date of filing claim petition. It is also submitted that learned tribunal has awarded Rs.68,500/- in all but this calculation is erroneous because as per 3 award itself Rs.43,500/- were awarded under the head of Medical Bills, Rs.15,000/- for injuries, Rs.10,000/- for permanent disability and Rs.9,000/- for bed rest for a period of three months and upon calculating the aforesaid amount, it comes to Rs.83,500/- but erroneously the learned Tribunal has passed an award for Rs.68,500/-. It seems that it is a calculation mistake, therefore, it is also required to be rectified. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant and perused the finding of the Tribunal given in the judgment dated 14.5.2010. Admittedly, the appellant received two grievous injuries and five simple injuries and for treatment, he has produced medical bills for Rs.43,500/-. Learned Tribunal has awarded the entire amount of medical bills, which is Rs.43,500/-. For the injuries, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/-, that too, is proper. In the claim petition, the appellant himself stated that his monthly income is Rs.2100/- but Tribunal awarded Rs.9,000/- for three months bed rest, which is in higher side. Under the head of travelling expenses, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.6,000/-, which is also proper because the appellant himself has failed to prove the travelling expenses before the Tribunal. For permanent dis-ability, learned Tribunal has awarded 4 Rs.10,000/-, that too, is not illegal because as per appellant he was earning Rs.2100/- per month and learned tribunal awarded entire medical bills of Rs.43,500/- for treatment of two grievous injuries and five simple injuries. Therefore, it is abundantly clear that award passed by learned Tribunal is based on proper application of mind and while taking into consideration the facts and evidence of the case, in which there is no error. Therefore, no case is made out for enhancement of compensation because it has rightly been assessed by the Tribunal. With regard to second question that the Tribunal has not rightly calculated the award, it appears from the perusal of the award that the Tribunal has allowed the compensation on different head, which is as follows : 1. Travelling Expenses : Rs.6,000/- 2. Bed Rest : Rs.9,000/- 3. Permanent Disability : Rs.10,000/- 4. Medical Bills : Rs.43,500/- 5. Injuries : Rs.15,000/- Total : Rs.83,500/- Therefore, obviously due to calculation mistake, in the operative part of the award, the Tribunal has awarded 5 Rs.68,500/- instead of Rs.83,500/-. Therefore, the error committed by the Tribunal is hereby rectified and it is held that as per the calculation of award total amount comes to Rs.83,500/-, therefore, the appellant is entitled for Rs.83,500/- instead of Rs.68,500/-. The judgment and award is modified to the above extent. With regard to claim of interest @ 9%, that too, from the date of filing claim, I am of the opinion that in this case claimant is injured and for the period in which the appellant was under treatment, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.9,000/- for three months for bed rest even though as per appellant himself he was earning Rs.2,100/- per month, therefore, as per Section 171 of M.V. Act, there is discretion left with the Tribunal to allow the simple interest in addition to compensation either from the date of claim or from the date of judgment and Tribunal has exercised its discretion with due application of mind and granted interest from the date of judgment in which I see no reason to interfere because the award has been passed by the Tribunal on the basis of facts and evidence on record. Therefore, 6% interest which is awarded by the Tribunal is not erroneous. Hence, this misc. appeal is hereby dismissed. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J arun