IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Appeal From Order No. 808 of 2006 Davendra Tyagi …Appellant Versus M/s Banarsidass Chunnumal (Chemist) & others .. Respondents Sri Lalit Sharma, Advocate, for appellant. Sri Lalit Miglani, on behalf of Sri Pankaj Miglani, Advocate, for respondent no. 1 Sri M.K. Goyal, Advocate, for respondent no. 2 Dated: May 8, 2008 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. This appeal, under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 01.09.2006 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar, in MACP No. 184 of 2004, Davendra Tyagi versus M/s Banarsidass Chunnumal & others. The claimant-Davendra Tyagi filed a claim petition before Claims Tribunal for grant of compensation on account of injuries sustained by him in a motor accident which occurred on 23.01.2004 at 9.20 p.m. near Anand Seeds at Kashipur-Kundeshwari road by rash and negligent driving of driver of Armada Jeep No. UP-04B-7339. The claimant was taken to Kashipur for primary aid and thereafter he was referred to Meerut for treatment. The claimant has pleaded that about Rs. One lac was expended on his medical treatment. According to the claimant, due to the said accident he has become partly disabled. At the time of 2 accident claimant was 49 years of age and used to earn Rs.5000/- per month from medical practice. The opposite party no. 1 filed written statement admitting himself the registered owner of Jeep No. UP-04B-7339 and pleaded that his vehicle was insured with opposite party no. 2-The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. at the time of accident. The opposite party no. 2-insurance company filed its written statement denying almost all the contents of claim petition. It has pleaded that no information was given to insurance company with regard to alleged accident. It has also pleaded that driver of alleged Armada Jeep No. UP-04B-7339 was not having valid driving licence at the time of accident. It has further pleaded that it was burden on the part of claimant to prove that accident did not take place due to his own negligence rather it occurred due to rash and negligence of driver of offending vehicle. The opposite party no. 3-Smt. Usha Devi filed its written statement and alleged that she sold his Hero Honda Moped to Davendra Tyagi earlier before 23.1.2004 and after that date the whole liability relating to said vehicle is fastened upon Davendra Tyagi. The learned Tribunal on the basis of pleadings of parties framed relevant issues in the claim petition. Parties led evidence in support of their cases. The Tribunal after having considered the material available on record and hearing learned counsel for the parties decreed the claim petition in favour of claimant for a sum of Rs.57,242/-, 3 payable by opposite party no. 2-New India Insurance Co. Ltd., along with an interest @ 5% per annum. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid impugned judgment and award, the appellant-claimant has preferred the appeal before this Court. Heard Sri Lalit Sharma, Advocate, for appellant, Sri Lalit Miglani, on behalf of Sri Pankaj Miglani, Advocate, for respondent no. 1, Sri M.K. Goyal, Advocate, for respondent no. 2 and perused the record. Learned counsel for the appellant-claimant has submitted that the learned Tribunal awarded meager amount of compensation and the same should be enhanced by this Court. I have gone through the impugned judgment and award. The claimant has stated in his deposition that in the accident he sustained serious injuries and he was treated at Kashipur and Meerut Hospital and uptil now Rupees One Lac has been expended on his treatement. The claimant has filed the bills pertaining to his medical treatment. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.52,242/- towards medical expenses of claimant. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.5000/- towards physical and mental agony. In this way, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs.57,242/- as compensation to the claimant. Apart from the amount of compensation awarded in favour of claimant, the Tribunal has not taken into consideration this aspect that the 4 claimant by sustaining the injuries caused in the said accident had to go under the medical treatment at Meerut also. Therefore, this aspect cannot be ignored that the claimant must have suffered financial loss on account of injuries sustained by him in the accident. The Tribunal should have awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/- for loss of income of the claimant. The claimant must have invested a sum of Rs.5000/- for transportation and special diet, therefore, the claimant is also entitled to receive a sum of Rs.5000/- under this head. The interest indicated by the Tribunal in the impugned judgment and award is 5% which appears to be on lower side. It should be 7% instead of 5%. On the basis of aforesaid assessment of evidence, I come to the conclusion that the appeal is liable to be partly allowed. The appellant-claimant is entitled for a sum of Rs.57,242 +Rs.20,000 +Rs.5,000 =Rs.82,242/- along with an interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of actual payment. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is parlty allowed. The compensation of Rs.57,242/-, awarded by the Tribunal, is enhanced to Rs.82,242/-. The rate of interest, awarded by the Tribunal, at 5% per annum is also enhanced to 7% per annum. The impugned judgment and award stands modified accordingly. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) SP 5