SANJAY SUKHDEO MANKAR Vs. DADARAO S/O MADHUKAR MANKAR
LAWS(BOM)-2017-6-264
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on June 22,2017

Sanjay Sukhdeo Mankar Appellant
VERSUS
Dadarao S/O Madhukar Mankar Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Shalini Phansalkar Joshi, J. - (1.) In Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 183/2003, the Chairman, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Akola awarded the compensation of Rs.64,000/ with interest at the rate of 8% per annum from 17/06/2003 till realization of the entire amount of compensation to the appellant. Being not satisfied with the amount of compensation awarded therein, appellant has preferred this appeal.
(2.) Brief facts of the appeal are as follows : Appellant is the owner of Tractor bearing no. MH30E 7795. On 06/03/2001 at about 2:30 p.m. appellant was driving his Tractor on National Highway No.6 at Murtizapur. At that time one Ambulance bearing no. MH12RA02111 came from behind. It was driven in rash and negligent manner and in high speed and gave dash to the Tractor of the appellant. As a result, appellant sustained severe injuries and became unconscious on the spot. He also suffered extensive damage to the Tractor. Appellant was firstly treated in Laxmi Deshmukh Government Hospital at Murtizapur and then at District Government Hospital, Akola and thereafter at Mankar Hospital, Akola for about one month as indoor patient. Respondent no.1 was driving the said Ambulance at the time of accident and it was owned by respondent nos.2 and 3 and insured with respondent no.4. Appellant, therefore, filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act against respondents, claiming compensation of Rs.1,00,000/.
(3.) Respondent nos.1 to 3 denied their liability to compensate the appellant by submitting that the cause of accident was the rash and negligent driving of appellant as he was driving his Tractor in high speed on the National Highway and he arrived from the approach road without taking note of the vehicles passing on said road. Hence, respondents are not liable to pay any amount of compensation. In the alternate, it was submitted that the amount of compensation claimed by the appellant is exorbitant. He has hardly sustained any disability, much less permanent disability on account of the injuries sustained in the accident. It was further submitted that the claim made by appellant towards the compensation for repairs of the Tractor and medical expenses, therefore, being on higher side and not reasonable, his petition needs to be dismissed.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.