- (1.) This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner United India Insurance Company Ltd. against the order dated 22.3.2012 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I, jodhpur (for short, hereinafter referred to as Tribunal ) in Claim Case No. 622 of 2011 (253/2005), Sushil Agarwal v. Vinod Sharma & Ors., whereby the learned Tribunal ordered to constitute a Medical Board by the Superintendent of Mathura Das Mathur Hospital, jodhpur for examining the case of the claimant, namely, Sushil Agarwal, as to whether failure of his kidneys occurred on account of heavy dosages of antibiotics, which were given to him on account of injuries suffered by him in the course of the motor accident. The accident in question took place on 8.6.2003 when the claimant alongwith his family members was going from Delhi to Haridwar in the insured vehicle Car Taxi No. RJ-19-P-7842, which was driven in rash and negligent manner by its driver, Vinod Sharma, respondent No. 1 herein.
(2.) By the impugned interlocutory order dated 22.3.2012, the learned Tribunal directed the constitution of the Medical Board to ascertain this nexus of failure of kidneys, medical treatment and cause and costs thereof incurred by the claimant/respondent so that the Tribunal could arrive at the just and reasonable compensation for the claimant as required under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. The petitioner United India Insurance Co. Ltd., however, challenged this order before this Court by way of present writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and an ex parte interim order was passed in its favour on 30.5.2012 by a coordinate bench of this Court in the terms that "in the meanwhile and until further orders, the effect and operation of impugned order dated 22.3.2012 shall remain stayed".
(3.) On account of this interim order granted, the Medical Board could not be constituted and no report of the same came on record of the Tribunal. During the pendency of the present writ petition, the claim petition came to be finally decided by the learned Tribunal on 17.11.2012 and the compensation to the tune of 24,39,184/- was awarded to the claimant Sushil Agarwal in Claim Case No. 622/2011 (253/2005) alongwith another Claim Case No. 315/2012 (253/2005), for his family member. In para 38 of the final award dated 17.11.2012, the learned Tribunal specifically refused to pay any compensation for the expenses incurred by the claimant for treatment of kidneys damage caused to the claimant, for which an additional evidence was submitted by the claimant by way of Exhibits 609 to 884 viz., medical bills of L 6,30,749/-. In paras 23 and 38 of the final award, the learned Tribunal observed that since damage of kidney cannot be said to having been caused by the said accident, the insurer of the insured vehicle cannot be asked to pay such compensation. It would be relevant to reproduce the relevant paras 23 and 38 of the final award of Tribunal dated 17.11.2012 hereunder: 1637176-1;