- (1.) This appeal has been preferred against the judgement and order passed on 18th April, 2005 by the learned 9th Additional District and Sessions Judge at Alipore, South 24 Parganas in Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Case No. 101 of 1999, inter alia, on the ground that the Tribunal had erred in assessing the income of the claimant notionally at Rs. 15,000/-, should not have disallowed the medical expenses of Rs. 1,71,000/- and should have granted interest from the date of filing the claim petition. Referring to the deposition of PW-1, it is submitted on behalf of the appellant that as the claimant used to earn Rs. 3,500/- to Rs. 4,000/- per month as a skilled person, the Tribunal erred in assessing the annual income at Rs. 15,000/-. Relying on the principles of law laid down in the judgement of the Supreme Court in Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar and another, 2011 ACJ 1, particularly the law laid down in paragraph 11 thereof, it is submitted that since the Tribunal does not function as a neutral umpire as in a civil suit, but as an active explorer and seeker of truth, medical bills filed though not proved, should have been allowed. However, on a query the appellant has left it to the discretion of the Court. Prayer is also to grant interest from the date of filing the claim petition.
(2.) Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Insurance Company submits that since the deposition of PW-1 and PW-4 are contradictory, no order may be passed for enhancement of compensation. Heard learned advocates for the parties. It is evident from the deposition of claimant and PW-5 that the appellant was a skilled person. In the year 1998 she met with the accident. She was earning Rs. 3,500/- per month approximately. Since we find that she was a skilled person and was engaged in business, the monthly income of the appellant/claimant is determined notionally at Rs. 3,000/-, that is, Rs. 36,000/- per annum. Since the victim was in the age group of 40 to 45, the multiplier of 15 is to be adopted. Hence it comes to Rs. 5,40,000/-. Since the appellant had suffered 60% disablement, the compensation is assessed at Rs. 3,24,000/-. So far as the unproved medical expenses are concerned, it is to be borne in mind that the Tribunal had allowed medical expenses of Rs. 31,535/- which were countersigned and proved by the concerned doctor. So far as the unproved medical expenses of Rs. 1,71,000/- are concerned, we are of the view that those were neither proved nor countersigned by the concerned doctor and cannot be granted. Further expenses incurred subsequent to the date of filing of the claim petition cannot be allowed.
(3.) So far as the interest is concerned, in view of the settled proposition of law and in view of the various orders passed by this Court, the appellant is entitled to interest at the rate of 6% per annum to be calculated from the date of filing the claim petition till the date of deposit by the Insurance Company. Since it is submitted that the appellant has withdrawn a sum of Rs. 1,65,535/-, which includes the statutory amount of Rs. 25,000/-, the Insurance Company is directed to deposit the balance amount, including interest, before the Tribunal within four weeks from the date of presentation of a copy of the certified copy of this order and shall be disbursed in accordance with the award after proper identification. The order of the Tribunal is modified accordingly. The appeal is disposed of. Let lower court records be sent down immediately. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Tribunal for information. No order as to costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be furnished on priority basis. Appeal disposed of.;