R.L.ANAND, J. - (1.) THIS F.A.O. has been directed against the award dated 7.1.1993, passed by the Court of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ambala, who, partly allowed the claim-petition of the claimant Shri Tarwinder Singh and awarded a sum of Rs. 15,000/- only by way of compensation against respondents No. 1 to 3, jointly and severally on account of no fault liability.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that Shri Tarwinder Singh filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act and claimed a compensation of Rupees twenty-three lacs on the ground that he had suffered injuries in a motor vehicle accident caused by rash and negligent driving of Canter No. HR-04/0233, driven by respondent No. 2, Sahib Singh. The Canter was owned by Ishwar Chand Mittal, respondent No. 1 and it was insured with respondent No. 3. The case set up by the appellant is that he was employed as Junior Engineer in the Punjab Public Health Department and was drawing Rs. 3205/- as pay including all allowances and was also the owner of a Maruti Car No. DDC 8217. On 17.7.1990, he had gone to village Jabli, on official duty, along with some other officials of the Department. The claimant-appellant was driving the car. While returning back, when they reached near Surajpur bridge on Amabala-Kalka Road, one four wheeler canter No. HR-04/0233 driven by respondent No. 2 came from the front side at the high speed without blowing any horn and without caring for the bends in the road and hit the Maruti car of the claimant on the right side. As a result of this accident, the claimant-appellant had suffered injuries on his person including almost separation of right arm which was later amputated in the PGI Chandigarh and left hand was put under plastic bandage. It was alleged by the claimant that the accident had taken place due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 2. The claimant was 36 years old at the time of the accident. He spent a sum of Rs. 3,000/- on medicines. He further spent a sum of Rs. 4500/- on special diet. He had suffered a permanent disability of 85%. With this disability he has lost the chances of his promotion. With these allegations, the appellant has claimed a compensation to the tune of rupees twenty three lacs.
(3.) NOTICE of the claim petition was given to the respondents. Joint written statement was filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 and 2 in which they had denied the allegations. According to these respondents, the four-wheeler Canter was standing in a break down condition on its left side of the road. The petitioner-appellant was negligent. He dashed the car against the standing canter. It was further pleaded that had there been any negligence on the part of respondent No. 2, he would been involved in a criminal case. Even the father of the claimant admitted the fault of his son who was under the influence of liquor at the time of the accident. The amount of compensation claimed by the appellant is highly exaggerated. In the alternative, it was pleaded by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 that in case the liability is fixed, the Insurance Company is liable to pay the compensation to the extent of Rs. 1,50,000/-.;