- (1.)THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 22.1.2004 passed by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Panchkula, whereby while accepting the complaint of the respondent -complainant, direction has been given to the appellant -opposite party to pay Rs. 21,000 as compensation to the complainant for injuries and costs of proceedings, within one month from the date of order.
(2.)THE essential facts need to be focussed briefly in order to decide the present appeal. A Kinetic Honda scooter bearing registration No. HR 07 -A -6767 was owned by Shri Sandeep Chandan, brother of the complainant. The same was insured with the opposite party under cover note No. CH C 0641692 dated 10.4.2002 issued in the name of Sandeep Chandan. On 21.5.2002 the complainant Ms. Ritu Chandan while driving the said vehicle passed through dividing crossing of Sectors 10 -15, Panchkula and struck against the heap of stones and railings put by the HUDA on the road side for the purpose of fixing railings. The vehicle was over -turned resulting in injuries to the complainant. She was taken to the hospital from where she was shifted to P.G.I. where she remained up to 23.3.2002. The complainant claimed that at the time of accident she was aged about 23 years and after having graduated from Punjab University in the year 2001 was doing Post Graduate Diploma in Information Technology from Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar, she had to take her final semester examination in August 2004. She asserted that because of the accident she suffered loss of memory and could not remember his lessons coherently. She further stated that she had to incur expenses of Rs. 25,000 on medicines and on special diet, etc. She approached the opposite party claiming the aforesaid amount along with Rs. 2 lakh for the loss of memory and prospective loss of career and Rs. 25,000 for future treatment. The opposite party did not respond to the claim made by the complainant. Forced by these circumstances, the present complaint was filed.
(3.)THE opposite party contested the complaint. In the written statement filed it was pleaded that the complainant has no locus standi to file the complaint and the District Forum has no jurisdiction to try the complaint as no compensation on account of the injuries caused to the complainant in the motor vehicle accident can be determined by the District Forum and for that reason the complaint merited dismissal. At the same time it was stated in the written statement filed that cover note of the vehicle was issued in the name of Sandeep Chandan. Rest of the allegations made in the complaint were refuted. Accordingly, it was prayed that the complaint merited dismissal.
On scrutiny of the pleadings of the parties and evidence adduced on record, the District Forum accepted the complaint and issued the directions as noticed above in its order dated 22.1.2004. It is against this order, the present appeal has been filed.