IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINTAL. A.O. No. 240 of 2006 The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Haldwani …. Appellant. Vs. Smt. Chandra Devi and another …. Respondents. Mr. P.C. Maulekhi, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, Advocate for the respondent No.1 None appeared for respondent No.2. Dated: 30-4-2008 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. This appeal, under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 7-1-2006, passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/District Judge, Rudraprayag, in MACP No. 11 of 2005. 2- The brief facts of the case are that on 27-11- 2004, the claimant Smt. Chandra Devi along with others was travelling in Maxi Cab U.A. 07-G/8053 from Mansoona to her village Kaviltha. At about 6.30 P.M. the driver of the said vehicle dashed the car to a tree driving the vehicle at high speed, due to which the claimant sustained grievous injuries. Her both legs were broken, besides the injuries on several parts of her body. Therefore, she claimed a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- as compensation. 3- The owner of the vehicle filed his written statement before the Tribunal and alleged that the driver was having valid driving license but it met to accident due to technical defects developed in the vehicle. It was also alleged that the vehicle had valid papers including registration, permit, fitness, insurance policy and it was 2 covered for unlimited liability, hence the liability to pay the compensation is upon the shoulder of Insurance Company. 4- The Insurance Company also filed the written statement and alleged that the vehicle was being driven in sheer contravention to the condition of insurance policy and permit so the liability to pay the compensation is of the owner of the vehicle. 5- The learned Tribunal on the pleadings of parties framed relevant issues in the petition. The parties led evidence in support of their cases. Thereafter the Tribunal after hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the evidence on record, allowed the petition for a compensation of Rs. 2,61,000/- against the New India Assurance Company Ltd. and directed that the amount will be put in credit with the Tribunal by 1.3.2006, failing which compound interest @ 8% at quarterly rest will be payable. 6- Feeling aggrieved, the New India Assurance Company has preferred this appeal. 7- Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8- Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the vehicle was being carrying plied in sheer contravention of terms of insurance policy as 12 passengers were travelling in the vehicle instead of 10 for which it was authorized. He also contended that an exaggerated amount of compensation has been awarded in favour of the claimant. Learned counsel also submitted 3 that the Tribunal has wrongly awarded compound interest on the compensation amount. 9- From perusal of record reveals that the Insurance in its written statement has taken plea that the vehicle was being driven in sheer contravention of insurance policy. The insurance policy was valid from 4.2.2004 to 3.2.2005 for all liabilities with New India Assurance Company. The driving license was also valid at the time of accident. Once the driver was issued valid driving license to ply light motor vehicle, then the restriction imposed by licensing authority in the permit has got no relevance. The Tribunal also took note of the fact that the restriction on the permit was not in original scripts and a seal was got prepared and affixed on the permit without any initial and signature by any competent authority. 10- Further efforts were not made to prove the plea of overloading taken by the insurer. This plea was not taken before the trial court in specific terms. Therefore, the submission at the belated stage of appeal cannot be adjudicated. 11- So far as the amount of compensation is concerned, it reveals from the record that the claimant has not filed any certificate from the competent authority to show her permanent disablement on account of the injuries sustained by her in this accident. Although the claimant has pleaded that her both legs were broken from thigh but no reliable evidence in this regard has been produced. It is true that in hill regions the lady plays a pivotal role in running the house hold affairs as well as economy of the family by way of collecting the woods from the jungle, taming the buffalos, cows and 4 goats as well as collecting the grass for them. The Tribunal has also rightly inferred that the lady by doing all the aforesaid jobs, earns the livelihood of her family to make both ends meal and on account of the injuries sustained by claimant in this accident she has certainly reduced her capability for doing all the above works. The claimant has filed medical bills/vouchers before the tribunal to the tune of Rs. 1,60,767/- and the trial court has rightly believed those bills and vouchers and I do not find any justification for interference in the finding recorded by the trial court in this regard. However, it appears to me that the trial court has awarded a sum of Rs. One lac to the claimant for mental sufferance and physical pain. This amount awarded by the Tribunal is certainly in an exaggerated form. The claimant is a household lady and as I have already stated that by sustaining injuries in the accident she has reduced her capability in doing household affairs which must have certainly affected the economic condition of the family. Therefore, I am of the view that instead of awarding Rs. One Lac under aforesaid head, as has been given by the Tribunal, an amount of Rs. 50,000/- would be just and proper to meet the ends of justice. I, therefore, direct that the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs. 1,60,767/- rounded to Rs. 1,61,000/- + Rs. 50,000/-, total Rs. 2,11,000/- instead of Rs.2,61,000/-, as has been awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has directed that the compensation would be paid by the New India Assurance Company along with a compound interest of 8% which also does not appear to be justified. It should be simple interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of actual payment. 12- In view of above discussion the appeal is liable to be partly allowed. 5 13- Accordingly the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award dated 7.1.2006 is modified upto the extent that the claimant is entitled to get a compensation of Rs. 2,11,000/- along with interest @ 7.5% per annum from the date of filing petition till the date of actual payment, instead of Rs. 2,61,000/- along with compound interest @8%, as has been awarded by the Tribunal. 14- The statutory amount of compensation, if any, deposited at the time of admission of the appeal, be remitted to the Tribunal concerned. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) ISB 6