F ......—,.,..^y^..::.^,. :p-9^ ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MISC.APPEALfC) N0.,5^ / 2007 Appellant Rannjit Singh, S/o Guljar Singh, Aged about 30 years, R/o Santrabadi, Tahsil & Distt. Durg (C.G.) Claimant VERSUS Respondents M^.. .n' ^.f^r ^ -~ .^^' ..'*' ^yy ^</ l. Pyarelal, S/o Mohitram Chandra, Aged about 35 years, Jhop^Para, Korba, Tahsil & Distt. Korba (C.G.) ...Driver ofthe vehicle Jitendra Singh, S/o Namalum, R/o Village Quarter No.HJ.G.-sy, M.P. Nagar, Kosabadi, Korba^ Tahsil & Distt. Korba (C.G.). ....Owner ofthe vehicle 3. ^> -The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. - Through ,its Divisional Manager, Malviya Nagar, Durg, Tahsil & District Durg (C.G.) ....Insurer MISCELLANEOUSAPPEAL U/S 17.1 OF THE MOTORVEHICLE ACT 1088 ^•s:^-^2 HiGH COURT OF CHHATTSSGARH AT BILASPUR JVIisc. Aopeal (C) No. 393 of2007 APPELLANT C!aimant RESPONDEMTS Rannjit Singh Versus Pyareial and others. I'ViisceiSaneous appeal underSection 173 ofthe Rflotor VehidesAct1988 S.B: HoR'ble MrJusta'ce N.K.AaarwaJ Present : Shri P.R. Patankar, counsei for the appeilant. Shri Shaiiendra Sharma, counsei for respondent No.3. AWARD (08.09.2011) 1. This is ciaimants' appeai for enhancement in the amount of compensation awarded by 11 Additionai Motor Accidents Ciaims Tribunai, Durg (for short 'the Tribunai') vide av/ard dated 22.7.2006, passed in Ciaim Case No. 93/2006. 2. As against the compensation of Rs.3,50,000/- clalmed by appellants/ciaimant by fiilng a cjalm petition under Section 16S ofthe Motor Vehjcles Act for the injuries sustained by him in the motor accident on 30.3.2006, the Tribuna! awarded a totai sum of f . Rs.37,516/- as compensatlon aiong Vv'ith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of fiilng of the ciaim petition tiJI the date of actua! payment hoiding respondent No-3/Snsurance Company is iiabie for payment of compensation. 3. Learned Tribunai; on a ciose scruttny ofthe entire evidence led before it, he!d; the accident had occurred due to coiljsion between truck No.C.G.04ZC03934 being driven by appejiant/dajmant and. truck No.C.G.07^C03082 being driven by respondent No.1- Pyareiai; both the drivers equaiiy contributed to the cause of accldent; assessed the amourst of compensation as Rs.75,032'-; deducted 50% of it tovvards contributory negiigence of the appeilant; and awarded Rs.37,516/- as compensatlon to the appeliant/dajmant aiong vtfjth v ^Q';^% ff -^y' jnterest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition tjli the date of actual payment against the respondents. ^' |NN» 4. Shri P.R. Patankar, learned counsei appearing for the appeliants would submit: the leamed Tribunai has erred In hoiding appeiiant/cjaimant responsibie for contributory negiigence to the extent of 50% and thus has erred in avvardlng !ow amount of compensation. 5. On the other hand, Shri Shailendra Sharma, iearned counse! appearing for respondent No. 3 wouid submit: in the facts & circumstances of the case, the iearned Tribuna! has rightly held both the drivers equaily contributed to the cause of accident and rightiy deducted 50% of the amount of compensatlon towards contnbutory negligence ofthe appellant/cteimant. 6. I have heard learned counsei for the partles and perused the record of the Tribunai JncSuding impugned award. 7. A bare perusai of the record of the Tribunal Vv'oujd reveai the first F.i.R. vv'as lodged by respondent No.1 against the appeliant and on the basis of above F.i.R., crimina! case was reglstered against the appeilant. As per spot map (Ex. D-13), It appears that appei!ant Vv'as on the vvrong side vvhen the accident had occurred. After three months, F.i.R. Vv'as also lodged by the appellant against respondent No. 1 and spot map (Ex. P-9) was prepared on appeiiant's instructions which shows respondent No.1 was on the vvrong side. 8. The spot map (Ex. D-13) was prepared by the authorities whereas spot map (Ex.P-9) vvas prepared as stated by the appeiiant/cSalmant, therefore, spot map (Ex.D-3) appears to be more authentic and reliabie. 9. in view of above evidence, on the face it appears in fact the appeliant vv'as negligent in causing above accident, hovvever, the iesrned Tribunal.by app!ying principie of res Ipsa loqultor in the facts & clrcumstances of the case has held both the truck drivers equaliy contributed to the cause of accident and thereby deducted 50% ofthe amount of compensation awarded by It to the appeilant tovv'ards his contributory negiigence. fi 10. In vjevv' of above, l do not find any Infirmity jn the finding recorded by the Tribuna! holding appeiiant contributed to the cause of accident to the extent of 50% and thereby deducting 50% of the amount of compensation tov</ards his contributory negiigence. 11. No other points have been raised. 12. For the reasons mentloned hereinabove, the appeal belng •without substance js iiabie to be and js hereby dismissed. 13. No order as to costs. Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge v ^l