ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. OM PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. has filed the present appeal and it has been directed against the award dated 12.8.1995 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Karnal, which awarded a sum of Rs. 2,11,400 to respondent Om Parkash, along with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till recovery.

(2.) Some facts can be noticed in the following manner; Om Parkash was working as SHO of Police Station, Gharaunda at the relevant time when the accident took place on 16.7.93. He sustained injuries when he was travelling in a jeep which was insured by the appellant. The injured received multiple grievous injuries on various parts of his body including a fracture on his right leg with other lacerated wounds and abrasions. He was aged 46 years at the time of accident, Om Parkash respondent was shifted to Dr. Vijay Gupta's Nursing Home, Karnal, where he remained admitted as an indoor patient considerably for a long time and then he obtained treatment from that Dr. Vijay Gupta as outdoor patient. He remained admitted as indoor patient from 16.7.93 to 11.8.1993. Criminal case regarding this accident was registered in P.S. City Karnal bearing F.I.R. No. 461 dated 16.7.1993 under sections 279, 337 and 338, Indian Penal Code. The claimant filed the claim petition and claimed a compensation to the tune of Rs. 8,00,000 and the case set up by him before the Tribunal was that he was very active and well versed in police activities and used to take part in drill, physical training, crossing jumps and obstacles. He was considered to be an ideal officer and it was on account of his hard work and labour that he had been posted as SHO of P.S. Gharaunda but on account of this accident his chance of promotion has been marred. A number of operations were performed on his leg and 90 degree condylar plate with 9 holes was inserted in his leg which was stitched with 40 stitches. He further alleged that during the period of treatment he was unable to answer the call of nature in a proper manner. He was not in a position to move and had to arrange an attendant round the clock to look after him. He took costly medicines prescribed by the doctor and he also took rich diet. After the accident he has become a permanently crippled man and is unable to sit, squat, run, climb stairs, move fast, sit cross-legged, pedal a cycle and. drive a vehicle and he has become absolutely incapable of discharging the functions of a senior police officer. The claim petition was filed against the driver, owner and the insurance company.

(3.) On the pleadings of the parties the following issues were framed: (1) Whether the accident took place on account of negligence on the part of respondent No. 1 Prem Chand in driving jeep No. HR 10-6088 and in the accident petitioner received injuries? OPP (2) Whether at the time of accident respondent No. 1 Prem Chand had no valid driving licence and the vehicle was being driven in violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy? OPR-3 (3) Whether the claim petition is bad on account of non-joinder of necessary parties? OPR-3 (4) How much compensation the claimant is entitled to and from whom? OPP (5) Relief.