The 1st respondent was going along a public road riding a motor cycle, when another motor vehicle, the owner and rider of which allegedly was the appellant, hit against it causing the 1st respondent some injuries. The vehicle had no insurance. The Tribunal found that the 1st respondent is entitled to Rs.31,655/- as compensation as the accident was due to the negligence of the appellant. It has allowed the 1st respondent to recover the amount from the appellant. The appellant contends that he had sold the vehicle long before the accident and he cannot be made liable to pay the compensation. He also contends that the amounts awarded under some heads are not reasonable.
2. Though notice was served on the 1st respondent, there has been no appearance for him. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the 2nd respondent.
3. The 2nd respondent is an insurance Company.
Admittedly, there was no insurance for the vehicle.
4. The award passed by the Tribunal shows that the 1st respondent sustained the following injuries:
i. Head injury,
ii. Left scaphoid fracture,
iii. Abrasion over face,
iv. Abrasion (R) elbow,
v. Abrasion (R) knee,
vi. Tenderness over (L) wrist,
vii. Defect in (R) ear.
5. But the nature of the head injury is not mentioned. It is also not known what is meant by 'Defect in the right ear'.
6. It appears that the amounts awarded under the heads transport to hospital, damage to clothes, extra nourishment, medical expenses, by-stander's expenses and pain and sufferings are reasonable.
7. No evidence was adduced to prove that the 1st respondent had any occupation or had any income. The Tribunal took his monthly income as Rs.4,500/- and awarded him two months' income as loss of earnings. In the absence of any evidence to prove the occupation or income of the 1st respondent, the Tribunal should not have taken the monthly income as Rs.4,500/-. The accident happened in 2007. Rs.3,500/- appears to be reasonable. The 1st respondent is entitled to get only Rs.7,000/- under the head loss of earnings.
8. The amount awarded under the head - Loss of amenities and enjoyment of life is Rs.5,000/-. This also appears to be on the higher side. It is fixed at Rs.3,000/-.
9. Thus, the total amount the 1st respondent is entitled as compensation is:
Rs.31,655/- - Rs.4,000/- = Rs.27,655/- say Rs.27,700/-
10. The contention of the appellant that he had sold the vehicle long before the accident, cannot be taken into account. He was the registered owner of the vehicle at the relevant time. He is liable to compensate the third party, who sustained injuries. Moreover, he was the rider of the vehicle.
In the result this appeal is allowed in part. The award of the Tribunal is modified to the extent that the compensation is fixed at Rs.27,700/- (Rupees twenty seven thousand seven hundred only) with interest at the rate mentioned in its award.
Sd/-
K. ABRAHAM MATHEW, JUDGE //True Copy// P.A. To Judge jjj