Jasmer Kaur v. Jai Singh & Ors.

Delhi High Court · 27 Sep 2017 · 2017:DHC:5924
R. K. Gauba
MAC Appeal No.851/2010
2017:DHC:5924
civil appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed the appeal challenging the adequacy of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident, holding the award just and fair.

Full Text
Translation output
MAC Appeal No.851/2010 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 27th September, 2017
MAC.APP.851/2010
JASMER KAUR ..... Appellant
Through
VERSUS
JAI SINGH & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Pankaj Seth, Adv. for R-3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)

1. The appellant was the claimant before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Tribunal) in accident claim case (suit no.55A/09) instituted on 18.04.2009 on the averments that she had suffered injuries in a motor vehicular accident that had occurred on 03.01.2009 due to the negligent driving of a truck bearing registration no.HP-12A- 8635 by the first respondent, the said vehicle being registered in the name of the second respondent and insured against third party risk with the third respondent (insurer).

2. The Tribunal held inquiry and, by judgment dated 12.08.2010, accepted the case for compensation holding the second respondent negligent. The Tribunal awarded compensation in the total sum of Rs.68,110/- in favour of the appellant and directed the third respondent to pay the same with interest. The said amount includes 2017:DHC:5924 MAC Appeal No.851/2010 Rs.14,210/- as medical expenses, Rs.1,200/- as attendant charges, Rs.2,700/- towards travelling expenses and Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering.

3. The present appeal was filed expressing grievance that the compensation awarded is inadequate.

4. The appeal was put in the category of ‘regulars’ to be taken up on its own turn. Thereafter it was taken up in Lok Adalat on some dates in an effort to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement but with no result. When it is taken up for hearing, there is no appearance on behalf of the appellant.

5. It is noted that the injury suffered by the appellant was fracture on the lower end of the hand. In the given facts and circumstances, the award of compensation granted by the tribunal is found to be just and fair. There is no case made out for any enhancement.

6. Thus, the appeal is dismissed. R.K.GAUBA, J. SEPTEMBER 27, 2017 yg