(1.) IN a bodily injury case, the injured person being dissatisfied with the award of Rs. 1,48,200 with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum, has preferred this appeal under section 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act' ).
(2.) THE determination of the quantum of compensation by the decision-maker in this case is niggardly and reflects conservatism to the core and an outstanding orthodoxy in legal reasoning. Value of life and limb has not received due consideration at the hands of the decision-maker. Compensation awarded by the M. A. C. T. is very much mean and totally unfair 'in the views of reasonable men in general and of judges in particular', if we can borrow that phrase from Sachs, LJ. , in Jones v. Griffith, (1969)2 All ER 1015. Salmon, LJ. , in Fletcher v. Autocar and Transporters Ltd. , 1969 acj 99 (CA, England), said:
(3.) THE appellant sustained certain grievous injuries in an accident occurred on 21. 4. 96 at about 6. 30 p. m. on the footpath of Puttenahalli Bus Stop on Bangalore-Doddaballapura Road involving a motor vehicle, i. e. , Ambassador car bearing registration No. MET 7885 owned by respondent No. 2 and insured by the respondent no. 1. The appellant claiming that on the date of accident he was 31 years of age and serving as police constable in the Central reserve Police Force (CRPF) in No. 58 battalion in Bangalore, and due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident he was reduced totally non-functional, filed claim petition under section 166 of the Act before the IX Addl. Small Causes Judge, member, M. A. C. T. , Bangalore (for short, 'the M. A. C. T. ') and claimed compensation of Rs. 10,00,000. The quantum of compensation claimed in the claim petition has been amended from Rs. 10,00,000 to rs. 25,00,000 in this appeal by the appellant by filing LA. No. 2 of 2001 and the same was ordered by us on 10. 2. 2004.