Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Farook Vs. Anil and ors.

Farook vs Anil and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Madhya Pradesh Decided Apr 09, 2003
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/512184

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Misc. Appeal No. 648 of 2000
Subject
Motor Vehicles

Case Summary

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

-

Key legal issue
Motor Vehicles

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Farook

Advocate G.K. Neema, Adv.

Respondent

Anil and ors.

Advocate Verma and ;Promod Mitha, Advs.

Legal References

Reported In
2005ACJ271

Excerpt

- deepak verma and s.k. seth, jj.1. the appellant, aged 22 years, working as an operator and mechanic in photocopying machine, met with a motor accident on account of which his right arm from above the shoulder joint was amputated. he filed a claim petition against the respondents for awarding him compensation. on appreciation of evidence available on record the claims tribunal, dewas in m.v. case no. 151 of 1999; decided on 8.2.2000 awarded a sum of rs, 2,88,406 inclusive of medical treatment and fixing of the artificial limb for the appellant.2. the learned counsel for the appellant contended that exh. p-118 proves that appellant was getting a monthly salary of rs. 4,000 from patel enterprises where he was working as photocopy machine operator and mechanic. to prove this certificate pw 2, yunus patel, has been examined who has also testified that he was paying rs. 4,000 per month as salary to the appellant. he has also proved the certificate that has been issued and marked as exh. p-l 18. admittedly after amputation of his right arm and even after getting the artificial limb fixed in its place he would not be in a position to function as a normal person. for whole of his life he has to survive in this condition.3. after having gone through the record and after having heard the learned counsel for parties we are of the opinion that the amount deserves to be suitably enhanced. the amount awarded is on the lower side. we, therefore, direct that a lump sum payment of rs. 4,00,000 to the appellant inclusive of medical treatment would meet the ends of justice. the impugned award is, therefore, modified to the extent that the appellant would be entitled to receive a sum of rs. 4,00,000 from the respondents jointly and severally. the difference in amount shall carry interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum from the date of application till it is paid.4. appeal is allowed partly to the extent mentioned above with costs throughout. counsel's fee rs. 1,000, if certified.

Full Judgment

Deepak Verma and S.K. Seth, JJ.

1. The appellant, aged 22 years, working as an operator and mechanic in photocopying machine, met with a motor accident on account of which his right arm from above the shoulder joint was amputated. He filed a claim petition against the respondents for awarding him compensation. On appreciation of evidence available on record the Claims Tribunal, Dewas in M.V. Case No. 151 of 1999; decided on 8.2.2000 awarded a sum of Rs, 2,88,406 inclusive of medical treatment and fixing of the artificial limb for the appellant.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that Exh. P-118 proves that appellant was getting a monthly salary of Rs. 4,000 from Patel Enterprises where he was working as photocopy machine operator and mechanic. To prove this certificate PW 2, Yunus Patel, has been examined who has also testified that he was paying Rs. 4,000 per month as salary to the appellant. He has also proved the certificate that has been issued and marked as Exh. P-l 18. Admittedly after amputation of his right arm and even after getting the artificial limb fixed in its place he would not be in a position to function as a normal person. For whole of his life he has to survive in this condition.

3. After having gone through the record and after having heard the learned counsel for parties we are of the opinion that the amount deserves to be suitably enhanced. The amount awarded is on the lower side. We, therefore, direct that a lump sum payment of Rs. 4,00,000 to the appellant inclusive of medical treatment would meet the ends of justice. The impugned award is, therefore, modified to the extent that the appellant would be entitled to receive a sum of Rs. 4,00,000 from the respondents jointly and severally. The difference in amount shall carry interest at the rate of 8 per cent per annum from the date of application till it is paid.

4. Appeal is allowed partly to the extent mentioned above with costs throughout. Counsel's fee Rs. 1,000, if certified.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial