Anwar Vs. Modiram and ors.

Anwar vs Modiram and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Jun 29, 2005

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/512005

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/512005
Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Judge: S.K. Gangele, J.
Decided On: Jun 29, 2005
Subject: Insurance;Motor Vehicles

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Key legal issue: Insurance;Motor Vehicles

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Anwar

Respondent

Modiram and ors.

Legal References

Reported In: IV(2005)ACC24

Excerpt

- .....by the tribunal is on lower side. learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the compensation is just and proper.3. it is clear from the evidence and findings of the tribunal that the appellant claimant, who was a driver has serious fracture injuries in his leg. his leg has been broken and thereafter a plate was inserted in his leg and it was fitted with screws. the tribunal has also observed on the basis of the evidence of the doctor that there was a plate at that time and it was fitted with screws. the tribunal has further held that the claimant cannot work as a driver because the plate will be there for whole life. on the basis of the above evidence, the tribunal has awarded rs. 48,000/- only as compensation for future loss of earning, which appears to be on lower side.4. the appellant was aged 40 years, hence a multiplier of 16 would be applicable and as per the tribunal the income of the appellant was rs. 2,000/-, which means rs. 24,000/- p.a., then the total loss of income comes to rs. 4,04,000/-. hence, if 30% permanent disability be counted, then the future loss of earning comes to around rs. 1,25,000/- and looking to the ailment and injuries of the appellant, in my opinion, it would be just and proper to award rs. 50,000/- towards pain and suffering to the appellant. the tribunal has awarded a total compensation of rs. 53,000/- to the appellant on account of future loss of earning and pain and suffering.5. in view of the above discussion, the appellant is entitled to get an enhanced, compensation of rs. 1,25,000/-. in these circumstances, the appeal is allowed to the extent that the appellant will get an enhanced compensation of rs. 1,25,000/-, which will carry interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of application till realisation. no order as to costs. the impugned award is modified to the above extent.

Full Judgment

S.K. Gangele, J.

1. The appellant has filed this appeal against the award dated 15.3.2001 passed in Claim Case No. 5/00. By the aforesaid award the learned Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs. 73,000/-, Rs. 48,000/- for future loss of income; Rs. 12,000/- for medical expenses; Rs. 5,000/- for pain and suffering and Rs. 8,000/- on other heads.

2. Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on lower side. Learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that the compensation is just and proper.

3. It is clear from the evidence and findings of the Tribunal that the appellant claimant, who was a driver has serious fracture injuries in his leg. His leg has been broken and thereafter a plate was inserted in his leg and it was fitted with screws. The Tribunal has also observed on the basis of the evidence of the doctor that there was a plate at that time and it was fitted with screws. The Tribunal has further held that the claimant cannot work as a driver because the plate will be there for whole life. On the basis of the above evidence, the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 48,000/- only as compensation for future loss of earning, which appears to be on lower side.

4. The appellant was aged 40 years, hence a multiplier of 16 would be applicable and as per the Tribunal the income of the appellant was Rs. 2,000/-, which means Rs. 24,000/- p.a., then the total loss of income comes to Rs. 4,04,000/-. Hence, if 30% permanent disability be counted, then the future loss of earning comes to around Rs. 1,25,000/- and looking to the ailment and injuries of the appellant, in my opinion, it would be just and proper to award Rs. 50,000/- towards pain and suffering to the appellant. The Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs. 53,000/- to the appellant on account of future loss of earning and pain and suffering.

5. In view of the above discussion, the appellant is entitled to get an enhanced, compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/-. In these circumstances, the appeal is allowed to the extent that the appellant will get an enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/-, which will carry interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of application till realisation. No order as to costs. The impugned award is modified to the above extent.

Same Court & Year Madhya Pradesh · 2005 Same Parties Anwar vs Modiram and ors. Same Subject Insurance;Motor Vehicles Same Judge S.K. Gangele, J.

Insurance;Motor Vehicles