IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL. A.O. No. 357/2007 Munawwar Khan … Appellant. Versus Smt. Amrita Miglani and another .. Respondents. Mr. T.S. Fartiyal, learned counsel for the appellant. Mr. M.K. Goel, learned counsel for respondent No.2. Dated: 24-11-2008 UHon’ble B.C. Kandpal, J. This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 18-7-2006, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/District Judge, Nainital, in MACT Case No. 79/2005, Munawar Khan Vs. Smt. Amrita Miglani and another. 2- Brief fact of the case are that on 11-9-2004, the claimant/appellant was travelling in Bus No. U.P. 02- D/6571 from Bareilly to Lucknow. When the said bus reached near Hempur Railway crossing, the bus driver collided it with a standing truck, due to which the claimant/appellant Munawwar Khan sustained grievous injuries. He was taken to Sitapur Hospital and thereafter he was brought to City Hospital Lucknow. He was also treated in Safdarjang Hospital New Delhi from 18.9.2004 to 17.11.2004. According to him he was operated for his hip injury and steel plate was inserted in the hip. The claimant also pleaded that he has become permanently disabled due to the injuries suffered by him. He therefore filed claim petition for award of compensation. 2 3- The opposite party, owner of the offending bus filed written statement and alleged that the accident has occurred due to the fault of the offending truck, as it was standing in the middle of the road without having any indicator. The claim petition is bad for non-joinder of owner and insurer of the said truck. The owner of the offending bus also alleged that the bus was insured with Oriental Insurance Company and the liability is upon the shoulder of the insurer. 4- The Oriental Insurance Company also took the plea that the claim petition is bad for non-joinder of owner and insurer of the offending truck, as the accident has occurred due to the fault of the driver of the said truck. The amount of compensation was also disputed by saying that excessive amount of compensation has been claimed. 5- The learned tribunal on the pleadings of parties framed issues in the claim petition. Thereafter, the claimant adduced evidence in support of his claim. The Tribunal after hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the material available on record, awarded a sum of Rs. 50,000/- as compensation and directed the Oriental Insurance Company to pay the awarded amount within two months. The claimant was also awarded interest @6% per annum from the date of filing the petition till the date of actual payment. 6- Being dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, the claimant has preferred this appeal for enhancement. 7- Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3 8- Perusal of impugned award reveals that P.W.1, Munawwar Khan, who was travelling in the offending bus, has deposed that the driver of the bus collided with the truck, which was standing at a corner of the road. This witness has specifically denied this fact that the truck was parked in the middle of the road without having any indicator. The report of the accident was lodged by P.W.2, Anwar Khan alleging therein that the driver of the bus collided with the standing truck in a rash and negligent manner and caused the accident. The opposite parties did not adduce any evidence in order to show that the truck in question was standing in the middle of the road and it has no indicator. The tribunal also concluded that the offending bus was insured with Oriental Insurance Company and its driver was possessing valid driving license. Therefore, I do not find any infirmity in the finding recorded by the tribunal holding the Insurance Company liable to pay the entire compensation. 9- As far as the amount of compensation is concerned, it appears from the record that the claimant filed the bills of the medical treatment pertaining to Rs. 38,420/-. The claimant has also filed the disability certificate showing that he has sustained 15% disability on account of the injuries sustained by him in the accident. The claimant has pleaded that he remained in the different hospitals with effect from 18.9.2004 to 17.11.2004. 10- In case if the claimant was admitted in the Hospitals for a period of about two months, then he must have invested some money for his special diet. He also must have engaged some person for his attendance in the hospital and must have invested some amount for 4 transportation. Keeping in view the aforesaid circumstances. I think that the sum awarded by the tribunal as Rs. 50,000/-, does not appear to be justified and it requires enhancement. I am, therefore, of the view that for the reasons stated above the claimant is entitled for a lump sum amount of Rs. 75,000/- along with an interest awarded by the tribunal, instead of Rs. 50,000/-. 11- For the discussion made above, the appeal is liable to be partly allowed. 12- Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and award dated 18-7-2006, is modified upto the extent that the claimant is entitled to get a sum of Rs. 75,000/-, from Oriental Insurance Company along with an interest awarded by the Tribunal, instead of Rs. 50,000/-, as has been awarded by the tribunal. (B.C. Kandpal, J.) ISB 5