Skip to main content

Shock, pain factors in fixing accident relief: Tribunal

Besides injuries, other factors such as shock, pain, fear, trauma and agony of an accident victim too should be taken into account to determine compensation package, a motor accident claims tribunal said, awarding Rs 2.6 lakh compensation to a schoolgirl.

The matter relates to a road accident involving P Jasmin of Korrukkupet. On October 1, 2010, Jasmin, who was five years old then, was travelling in an autorickshaw in north Chennai when the vehicle dashed against a lorry. The girl was thrown off the vehicle and two fingers on her right hand had to be removed. Her father moved the tribunal seeking compensation from the vehicle owner C Sri Ram of Sowcarpet and its insurer United India Insurance.

The insurance company refuted compensation claims on the ground that the autorickshaw's fitness certificate expired a month before the accident, and its policy coverage too had expired. "The alleged injuries were superficial" and "the quantum of compensation sought was excessively high," said the company. It also said the lorry driver had not been impleaded in the proceedings.

Rejecting the arguments, judge J Chandran said as the girl's little and ring fingers had been amputated, resulting in her losing her hand's grip, she could not go to school with "fun, joy and enjoyment." Further, she lost her ability to participate in sports and her future career options were marred as she would not be fit for a job in uniformed services, he said.

Fixing the level of her disability at 10%, the court awarded her the compensation for future loss of income, pain and sufferings, extra nourishment, medical expenses and permanent disability.

If the vehicle owner did not renew the certificate of fitness, it was a breach of rules and he was solely liable to pay compensation, said the court, adding that United India could realize the amount from Sri Ram.

It was the autorickshaw driver, and not the girl, who was responsible for the accident, the judge said. He also rejected the argument that the lorry driver ought to have been impleaded as a party in the case.

 Article referred: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Home/Lok-Sabha-Elections-2014/News/Shock-pain-factors-in-fixing-accident-relief-Tribunal/articleshow/33762161.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Amendment of plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC explained

Cause Title :  Ganesh Prasad vs Rajeshwar Prasad, SLP (C) NO. 28377 OF 2018, Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : 14/3/2023 Corum : J. B. Pardiwala, J. Citied:  Revajeetu Builders and Developers v. Narayanaswamy & Sons and Others reported in (2009) 10 SCC 84 North Eastern Railway Administration, Gorakhpur v. Bhagwan Das reported in (2008) 8 SCC 511 P.A. Jayalakshmi v. H. Saradha and Others reported in (2009) 14 SCC 525 B.K. Narayana Pillai v. Parameswaran Pillai and Another reported in (2000) 1 SCC 712 A.K. Gupta and Sons Ltd. v. Damodar Valley Corporation reported in AIR 1967 SC 96 Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Sanjeev Builders Private Limited and Another, Civil Appeal No. 5909 of 2022 dated 01.09.2022 Firm Sriniwas Ram Kumar v. Mahabir Prasad and Others reported in AIR 1951 SC 177 G. Nagamma and Another v. Siromanamma and Another reported in (1996) 2 SCC 25 Praful Manohar Rele v. Krishnabai Narayan Ghosalkar and Others reported in (2014...
Post a Comment
Read more

Owner of vehicle is not expected to verify the genuineness of the driving license before appointing a driver

Cause Title : Rishi Pal Singh Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 4919 Of 2022, The Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : July 26, 2022 Corum : Hemant Gupta; J., Vikram Nath; J. Background the truck owned by the appellant met with an accident. The owner deposed before the court that before employing the driver, he had taken his driving test and that he was driving the vehicle satisfactorily and  that the driver was employed with him for 3 years before the date of the accident. He produced his driving license. This was reaffirmed by the driver who deposed that the driving license was obtained from the driver and it was issued from Nagaland, but no such license was produced on record. Both the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the High Court have held that the owner has alleged that the driver had a driving license from Nagaland but the same was not produced and therefore, the Insurance Company is entitled to recover the awarded amount...
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more