COURT OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL KAMRUP :: GUWAHATI. MAC Case No. 881 of Md Surjat Ali Claimant. Versus

Transcription

1 1 COURT OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL KAMRUP :: GUWAHATI Present :- B J Mahanta Member, MACT Kamrup, Guwahati MAC Case No. 881 of 2011 Md Surjat Ali Claimant Versus 1 Sri Sameswar Barman (Driver of vehicle no. AS ) 2 Sri Bireswar Bhuyan (Owner of above vehicle) 3 New India Assurance Co Ltd (Insurer of above vehicle) Opp Parties Date of Argument : Date of Judgment : For the claimant : Ms N D Sharma For OP No. 1 : None For OP No. 2 : Mr S Zaman For OP No. 3 : Mr A Kalita J U D G M E N T This MAC case arises out of a petition filed by claimant, Md Surjat Ali, u/s 166 of the MV Act, claiming compensation from OP No. 2, owner, & OP No. 1, driver of the offending vehicle (Bus) having registration no. AS-19/1665, and OP No. 3, insurer thereof, M/s New India Assurance Co Ltd, to the tune of Rs 3,80,000/- for causing him injury in an accident taking place at Gerukabari at about 5.15 PM of by the said vehicle. The case of the claimant in brief is that on the aforesaid date and at the aforesaid time when he was going from Bongaigaon towards Bijni by the aforesaid offending vehicle

2 2 and reached the aforesaid place of occurrence, the aforesaid offending vehicle (Bus) being driven in very high speed and in negligent manner, suddenly dashed against a standing truck, causing him injury. Gerukabari PP made GD entry no. 343 dated regarding the accident. The accident took place due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the aforesaid offending vehicle. OP No. 1, driver of the offending vehicle, did not contest the case by filing written statement and, so, the case proceeded ex-parte against him. However, OP No. 2, owner, as well as OP No. 3, insurer, M/s New India Assurance Co Ltd, contested the case by filing written statement. The case of OP No. 2, owner of the offending vehicle, in brief is as under :- The allegations regarding the aforesaid accident taking place at the aforesaid place of occurrence on the aforesaid date & at the aforesaid time causing injuries to the claimant is admitted. However, all the other allegations made by the claimant in the claim-petition, including the allegation that the aforesaid offending vehicle was driven in rash & negligent manner at the relevant time causing the accident, are denied. The claimed amount is highly excessive and exaggerated. The offending vehicle was duly insured with OP No. 3, New India Assurance Co Ltd, and the driver had valid driving licence at the relevant time. So, if any liability to pay any compensation arises, the burden lies with OP No. 3, insurance company. The case of OP No. 3, insurance company, in brief is as under :- All the allegations made by the claimant in the claim-petition are denied and the claimant is put to strict proof thereof. The claimed amount is highly excessive and exaggerated. decided :- On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues are required to be 1 Whether claimant, Surjat Ali, sustained injuries in the alleged road accident dated involving vehicle no. AS (Bus) and whether the said accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the aforesaid offending vehicle by its driver?

3 3 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to receive any compensation and if yes, what will be the quantum of compensation and by whom amongst the opposite parties, the said compensation amount will be payable? During enquiry, the claimant has examined himself as PW-1 and has produced a number of documents. The contesting opposite parties have not examined any witness to prove their case. Arguments of both the sides heard. I have carefully perused the entire materials brought on record, heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and decided the issues as under :- ISSUE NO. 1 According to claimant, PW-1, on the aforesaid date and at the aforesaid time when he was coming from Bongaigaon towards Bijni by the aforesaid offending vehicle and reached the aforesaid place of occurrence, the aforesaid offending vehicle (Bus) being driven in very high speed and in negligent manner, dashed against a standing truck, causing injuries to his person. He firmly says that the said accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the said vehicle by its driver. Nothing has been elicited during the cross-examination of claimant, PW-1, to raise any doubt regarding the veracity of his above claims on the issue. The contesting opposite parties also have not adduced any contrary evidence on the issue. Ex-1, Form No. 54, supports his claim that the aforesaid accident, involving the aforesaid offending vehicle, took place at the aforesaid place of occurrence at the aforesaid time of the aforesaid date, causing him injury and that Gerukabari PP made a GD Entry no. 343 dated regarding the accident. Ex-1(i) FIR clearly shows that the aforesaid accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the said vehicle by its driver. In view of the above oral and documentary evidence on record, it is found and held that issue no. 1 is decided in the affirmative. ISSUE NO. 2

4 4 In view of the decision arrived at in respect of issue no. 1, it is found and held that the claimant is certainly entitled to receive compensation in this case. In determining the quantum of compensation the claimant is entitled to receive, let us first find out the nature and the extent of the injuries sustained by him in the accident, the nature and the extent of the treatment received by him for such injuries and the extent of the expenditures incurred by him for such treatment. Regarding the nature and the extent of the injuries sustained by the claimant in the accident and the nature and the extent of the treatment received by him for such injuries, according to claimant, PW-1, he sustained grievous injury on his stomach and chest. He also sustained fracture of his right leg, multiple rib fracture on right side, fracture of lower end of fibula, abdominal injury and injuries on other parts of the body. Immediately after the accident he was admitted at Lower Assam Hospital at Chapaguri, Bongaigaon. He proves Ex-2 as discharge certificate, Ex-3 as doctor s certificate and Ex-4(i) & Ex-4 (ii) as prescriptions. Ex-2, discharge certificate, shows that he was admitted at Lower Assam Hospital and Research Centre on and he was discharged there from on Ex-2 further shows that he was diagnosed as sustaining blunt abdominal injury, multiple sites rupture of small intestine and compound fracture of fibula (lower end). As treatment exploratory Laparotomy, repair of multiple lacerated site in the small intestine and anatomy of the rupture of small intestine was done. Moreover, thorough exploration and debridment of the compound fracture of lower end of fibula was done. Ex-3 certificate issued by Lower Assam Hospital and Research Centre has also mentioned the above mentioned facts regarding the injuries sustained by him and treatment taken by him. Ex- 4(i) & Ex-4(ii), shows that he visited Lower Assam Hospital and Research Centre on later dates also for medical advice. In view of the above, it is found and held that the claimant sustained grievous injuries in the accident. Regarding the extent of the expenditure incurred by the claimant for treatment of his injuries, claimant (PW-1), doesn t say anything regarding the amount spent by him for

5 5 his treatment. However, he has proved Ex-4 series as prescriptions and Ex-5(1) to Ex- 5(70) as various bills & vouchers regarding such expenditures. On perusal of the aforesaid medical documents, it is found that he spent about Rs 70,000/-, for treatment of his injuries in this case. According to claimant, PW-1, he was earning Rs 7,000/- at the relevant time, but due to his injuries he could not work for few months. Though there is nothing in his evidence-in-affidavit regarding his occupation being cross-examined he says that he was a cultivator. However, no document regarding his income has been submitted. So, it is assumed that he used to earn Rs 4500/- per month at the relevant time. However, no disability certificate has been submitted in this case to show that he suffered any permanent disability due to the injuries sustained. On the other hand, the evidence on record shows that he took treatment as an indoor patient at Lower Assam Hospital & Research Centre from to only. Hence, it is held that he is not entitled to receive any amount for loss of income. However, considering the nature and the extent of the injury sustained by him in the accident, it is held that he is entitled to receive an amount of compensation for pain and suffering. Thus, the total compensation comes to :- Medical expenses : Rs 70, Pain and suffering : 30, Total : Rs 1,00, According to the claim-petition, the aforesaid offending vehicle was insured with OP No. 3, M/s New India Assurance Co Ltd, at the relevant time. Ex-1, Form No. 54, supports that fact. Hence, it is found and held that OP No. 3, insurer of the offending vehicle, is liable to pay the aforesaid amount to the claimant as compensation in this case. O R D E R The claim-petition is allowed. The claimant is awarded Rs 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) only with 6% p.a. from the date of filing the claim petition, i.e , till payment as compensation to be paid by OP No. 3, insurance company. OP No. 3, M/s

6 6 New India Assurance Co Ltd, is directed to pay the award-amount within one month from the date of this order. Given under my hand & seal of this Court on this the 31 st day of March (B J Mahanta) Member Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 1 Kamrup, Guwahati