SMTI MITHU BHATTACHARJEE W/O LT. MANOJ BHATTACHARJEE AND 2 ORS. Vs. MD BADAR ALAM S/O MD AKBOR ALI @ ALAM
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Smti Mithu Bhattacharjee W/O Lt. Manoj Bhattacharjee And 2 Ors.
Md Badar Alam S/O Md Akbor Ali @ Alam
Click here to view full judgement.
KALYAN RAI SURANA,J. -
(1.) Heard Mr. A.K. Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mr. S. Dutta, the learned Senior counsel, assisted by Ms. M. Choudhury, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2 and Mrs. R.D. Mozumdar, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3.
(2.) This appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as "MV Act") is preferred against the judgment and award dated 03.05.2007, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tinsukia in MACT Case No. 3/2005. This appeal is for enhancement of award on the ground that the learned Tribunal had not considered the addition on account of future prospects and there was an error in computing the salary allowable for the purpose of computing the compensation.
(3.) The case of appellant in brief is that while the deceased, namely, Manoj Bhattacharjee was going from his residence towards his office on his scooter bearing registration No. AS-23/A-8258. Near St. Lukes Hospital, the offending truck bearing registration No. AS-23/8269 which was being driven in the rash and negligent manner by Md. Badar Alam, respondent No. 1, came from the wrong side and knocked down the scooter. As a result, the deceased fell down on the road and succumbed to the injuries while being taken to hospital. At the time of his death, the deceased was serving as a Manager of Allahabad Bank, Chariali Branch. It was projected that the deceased was 39 years old and he was drawing a gross salary of Rs. 18,994.70. In the claim petition, the appellant sought for a compensation of Rs. 30,61,321.60. The respondent No. 1 by filing his written statement had denied his liability on the ground that the accident took place due to negligence of the deceased. The respondent No. 2 i.e. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. who was the insurer of the offending truck by filing the written statement, took the usual pleas and put the appellant to strict proof of their claim. The respondent No. 3 i.e. National Insurance Co. Ltd., denied its liability on the ground that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the truck.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.