IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL. A.O. No. 350 of 2006 Jaswant Singh @ Jasaud Singh .. Appellant. Versus Trilok Singh and another .. Respondents. Sri M.C. Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant. Sri P.C. Maulekhi, learned counsel for the respondent No.2. None has appeared on behalf of respondent No.1. Dated: 26-6-2008 Hon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 29-4-2006, passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/District Judge, Champawat, in MAC No. 32 of 2005. 2- The facts of the case, in a nutshell, are that on 9-9-2004, the claimant Jaswant Singh was standing at the corner of the road near Beerbhatti to catch the bus to go to Ranikhet. At about, 1.30 P.M. Bus No. UA 04- 7862 came from Haldwani to Ranikhet. The driver of the bus was driving the said bus in a high speed. The bus dashed the claimant, and its tyre was climbed on his thigh, due to which he was seriously injured and became unconscious. Information of the accident was sent by his brother through registered post to the S.S.P., Nainital. The injured was brought to Krishna Hospital and Research Center, Haldwani for treatment, where he remained admitted from 9-9-2004 to 17-9-2004. The injured was not treated there, hence he was referred to some higher center for better treatment. The claimant, thereafter, remained admitted in All India Institute of Medical Sciences. The claimant has not yet recovered 2 fully and his treatment is expected in future also. The claimant filed claim petition for a sum of Rs. 10,60,000/. 3- The Opposite Party no.1, owner of the offending bus filed his written statement alleging therein that the accident did not occur due to rash and negligence of the driver. He also alleged that exorbitant amount of compensation has been claimed. The owner also contended that the vehicle in question was insured with New India Assurance Company and its driver had valid driving license, therefore, the liability of compensation, if any, is upon the insurer. 4- The New India Assurance Company also filed written statement denying the allegations made in the petition. According to the insurer, no information of the accident was furnished to the insurance company. Exorbitant amount of compensation has been claimed. The Insurance Company also pleaded in the W.S. that the owner of the offending bus is put to strict proof of the filing valid documents pertaining to the offending bus and the valid driving license of the driver. 5- The tribunal framed relevant issues in the claim petition. The claimant examined himself as P.W.1 and filed documents in support of his case. The Opposite Parties did not adduce oral evidence, but filed documents pertaining to offending bus and the driving license. 6- The learned tribunal after hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the evidence on record, awarded a sum of Rs. 3,42,546/- along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of final payment, against the New India Assurance Company. 3 7- Feeling aggrieved, the claimant has preferred this appeal for enhancement. 8- Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 9- Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that although the permanent disability of the claimant has been assessed up-to an extent of 40%, but due to the accident the claimant has become permanently incapable for driving and as such his inability is hundred percent instead of forty percent. Learned counsel also submitted that the Tribunal has awarded a meager amount on account of physical and mental sufferings due to permanent disability. He also submitted that rate of interest has been awarded on lower side. 10- Learned counsel for the respondent/New India Assurance Company has opposed the submission and contended that the Tribunal has awarded adequate amount of compensation and needs no interference. 11- From perusal of record it reveals that the claimant has submitted medical bills to the tune of Rs. 92,746/-. The Tribunal has awarded this sum under the head of medical expenses. In my opinion the Tribunal was justified in awarding this sum towards medical expenses. The claimant also filed disability certificate paper No. 9-C-1/15, according to which the claimant was disabled upto 40%. The claimant at the time of accident was 34 years of age and his monthly income was Rs. 4,500/-. Salary certificate paper No. 31-B has been filed issued by Transport and Forwarding Agency, where he was employed. The annual income comes to Rs. 4 54,000/-. The Tribunal after 1/3rd deduction assessed the annual loss at Rs. 36,000/- and after adopting the multiplier of 17, the amount comes to Rs. 6,12,000/-. The disability was 40%, therefore, the loss due to disability comes to Rs. 6,12,000 X 40/100= Rs. 2,44,800/-. The Tribunal has awarded this sum towards loss suffered by the claimant due to his disability. I do not find any infirmity in the above calculation. From the side of the claimant no effort was made to establish this fact that he has become incapable of driving the vehicle due to the injuries. The doctor, who has treated him, has also not been produced to prove this fact. In absence of any cogent and reliable evidence, it cannot be held that the claimant has become totally incapable of driving the vehicle after the said accident and his inability be treated 100% for purposes of calculating the loss suffered by him due to the disability of 40% assessed by the competent authority. The submission of the learned counsel in this regard is not tenable. The tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards physical and mental agony. Again I do not find any force in the submission of the learned counsel that more amount should have been awarded towards the physical and mental agony. According to the claimant he remained admitted in Krishna Hospital Haldwani for 9 days (9-9-2004 to 17-9-2004) and thereafter he was treated in AIMS, New Delhi. In the statement of the injured nowhere it has come that for the injuries he was ever operated, but looking to the nature of injuries and period of treatment, the tribunal has awarded just and adequate amount towards physical and mental pain. Therefore, the Tribunal has awarded a total amount of Rs. 92,746/- + Rs. 2,44,800/- + Rs. 5,000/- = Rs. 3,42,546/-. I do not find any ground to interfere in the finding recorded by the tribunal on the quantum of compensation. 5 12- So far as the rate of interest is concerned, the submission of learned counsel for the appellant has force. The Tribunal has awarded interest @ 6% per annum, which is certainly on lower side. In my opinion the interest should be awarded @ 7.5% per annum. 13- For the reasons recorded above, the appeal, so far as the rate of interest is concerned, is liable to be partly allowed. 14- The impugned judgment and award dated 29- 4-2006, is modified upto the extent that the claimant shall be entitled to get the amount of compensation of Rs. 3,42,546/-, as has been awarded by the Tribunal, from the New India Assurance Company, along with interest @ 7.5% per annum, from the date of filing the petition, i.e. 24.8.2005 till the date of actual payment, instead of 6% per annum, has been has awarded by the Tribunal. 15- With the aforesaid observation, the appeal is partly allowed. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) ISB 6