SBCMA No.702/2008
Indeer Mal Vs. Mohd. Yakub & Ors.
1
SBCMA No.702/2008
Indeer Mal Vs. Mohd. Yakub & Ors.
DATE OF ORDER : - 11.12.2008
HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J.
Mr.Parikshit Nayak, for the appellant.
Mr.Anil Bachhawat, for the respondent no.2.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The appellant is aggrieved against the low award of
the compensation vide award dated 18th March, 2008
passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Banswara in
claim case No.180/2007.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
tribunal accepted the income of the appellant to be
Rs.8,000/- per month. The medical board of the
Government Hospital certified permanent disability of the
claimant as 43%. That has also been accepted by the
tribunal and monthly loss of the income to the claimant was
assessed Rs.3440/- per month but has has been reduced by
the tribunal on the plea that the appellant-claimant was
SBCMA No.702/2008
Indeer Mal Vs. Mohd. Yakub & Ors.
2
doing agricultural work with the help of servants. It is
submitted that the agricultural operation cannot be done by
one person and he is required to engage number of labours
for agricultural operation. It is submitted therefore, the
reduction of 50% of the loss of income of the appellant is
absolutely illegal and contrary to the facts of the case by
adopting principle laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court
in another set of facts of the case. It is also submitted that
in a case when the property passes on to the claimants they
are not denied the compensation on account of loss of
income.
Learned counsel for the respondent Insurance
Company contested the appeal and supported the reason
given by the tribunal and pointed out that the tribunal was
of the view that the medical board’s report is not
corroborated by the injury report as there are differences of
injuries in medical report and medical board’s certificate.
I considered the submissions of learned counsel for
the respondent on this count also and found that in the
medical report doctor specifically mentioned his opinion on
SBCMA No.702/2008
Indeer Mal Vs. Mohd. Yakub & Ors.
3
the basis of clinical examination and mentioned the
possibility of fracture. In clinical examination the doctor can
only advise for further examination by obtaining X-ray
report etc. Therefore, that cannot be said to be a vague
medical report given by the doctor, who clinically examined
the patient. In this case, the certificate given by the
medical board from the Government Hospital cannot be
ignored and when the medical board has certified that
appellant suffered 43.5% permanent disability, which has
been accepted by the tribunal itself, cannot be rejected for
any other purpose. The income which has been accepted
by the tribunal, cannot be rejected now when that has not
been challenged by anybody. The reduction out of the loss,
which claimant sought to the extent of 50% cannot be
justified and, therefore, the reduction is set aside. It is held
that the appellant suffered loss of Rs.3440/- per month on
account of injuries he suffered because of the disability of
43%.
In view of the above reason, the compensation
amount on this count is enhanced to Rs.3,30,240/- which is
SBCMA No.702/2008
Indeer Mal Vs. Mohd. Yakub & Ors.
4
rounded to Rs.3,30,250/-. On this enhanced amount, the
appellant shall be entitled to interest @ 6% per annum from
the date of filing of the claim petition. Rest of the award is
maintained.
The appeal of the appellant is allowed accordingly.
(PRAKASH TATIA), J.
c.p.goyal/-