(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. FIRST APPEAL NO. 743 OF 2006 Babanrao Anantrao Mehtre, Age : Major, Occupation : Service, .. Appellant R/o. Bhople Galli, Maliwada, (Original Ahmednagar. claimant) versus 1. Jafar Khan Mulla Khan, Age : Major, Occupation : Driver, R/o. Malgalli, Bhingar, Ahmednagar. 2. Shri Tulshiram Anantrao Mehtre, Age : Major, Occupation : Owner, R/o. Bhopale Galli, Maliwada, Ahmednagar. 3. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (through its Branch Manager, Ahmednagar ) 4. Shri Manoj Sukhdeo Deshmukh, Age : 20 years, Occupation : Business, R/o. Belgaon Mandva, Taluka Ashti, Dist. Beed. (2) 5. Shankar Bhaskar Lakare, Age : 42 years, Occupation : Driver, Batch No. 26064, R/o. Yevala, S.T. Depot, Yevala, District : Nasik. .. Respondents (Original 6. Maharashtra State Road Transport Corp. respondents) (through S.T. Depot Manager, Yevala). ....................... Mr. V.D. Patnoorkar, Advocate, for the appellant. Respondent nos.1, 3 to 6 served (Absent). Mr. D.R. Jaybhar, Advocate, for respondent no.2. ........................ CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 1ST APRIL 2010 COURT'S ORDER : 1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Counsel appearing for respondent no.2. None for respondent nos.1, 3 to 6 though duly served. 2. The claimant in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. (3) 742/1997, having faced dismissal by order dated 2nd February 2006, seeks to challenge the same. 3. The learned Chairman of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmednagar, while dismissing the petition, observed that since the claimant injured, a Government employee, has received Rs. 25,000/-, it will be sufficient to meet the claim as against permanent disability. He did not award further compensation. The reasons assigned by the learned Judge are, though the claimant assert having spent Rs. 50,000/- towards medical expenses, did not produce the relevant bills. The learned Judge also found, the claimant being a Government employee, could have or must have received the reimbursement of his medical bills. 4. The manner in which the accident has taken place, illustrate even if it was driven by respondent no.4, dashed against back side of the bus, the evidence led the learned Judge to believe the negligence should have been shared by the jeep owner, driver and Insurance Company and, on the other side, by S.T. bus. The contention of Insurance Company, the New India Assurance Company Ltd., that there was no driving licence with the respondent no.4, Manoj, is not established. The owner asserts that the vehicle was driven by Jafar Khan, however, the court negatived the same. (4) 5. There was evidence before the learned Judge, of the applicant, in which he has illustrated, from 28-11-1995 to 18-12-1995, the applicant was hospitalized for better treatment. He was also required to spend for medical diet and food. He suffered permanent injuries as movements of ankle of his right leg is affected, arresting free acceleration. Taking these aspects into consideration, though the medical bills of Rs. 50,000/- assertively narrated by the claimant are not produced, the learned Judge should have considered the long drawn hospitalization for virtually 20 days of the claimant. That apart, he was required to have frequent medical check ups in future coupled with the proper diet. In this scenario of the matter, dismissal of the claim by itself would not provide an answer to the dismal position, though the claim of Rs. 1,50,000/- is at higher pedestal, the learned Judge should have rationally considered the age, the period undergone in hospital, the medical expenses required to be met in future, the agony and loss of mental peace due to traumatic effect of the accident. Assessing these aspects, the following order would meet ends of justice. 6. The appeal is partly allowed. In addition to the amount of Rs. 25,000/- received under no fault liability, the respondents in the appeal shall jointly and severally pay an (5) amount of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) to the claimant with interest at the rate of 6 % from 2nd February 2006. No costs. ( K.U. CHANDIWAL ) JUDGE ......................... bgp/fa743