The Thane Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) in Maharashtra has awarded a compensation of Rs 49.33 lakh to a 29-year-old man for the injuries he suffered in a road accident in 2017.
MACT member M M Walimohammed, in the order passed on November 1, directed the owner of the offending tempo and its insurer to jointly and severally make the payment along with seven per cent interest per annum from the date of filing of the petition to the man within the next two months.
If they fail to do so, they will have to pay the interest at eight per cent till the realisation of the amount, the MACT said in the order, a copy of which was made available on Tuesday.
The tempo owner did not appear and the matter was decided ex-parte against him while the insurance company opposed the claim on various grounds.
The victim's counsel Sanjay Mane told the tribunal that his client had a job and earned a salary of Rs 34,277 per month.
On January 11, 2017, he was proceeding on his motorbike when the tempo coming from the opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner dashed him near the Cadbury Junction here.
The petitioner fell down and received severe injuries, he told the tribunal, adding that he had to incur medical expenses and undergo prolonged treatment.
He suffered disability and was unable to continue his job, the petitioner said.
The tribunal accepted the submissions and documents provided by the petitioner and awarded the compensation.
Humane gesture shown by the judge
In another case, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Puneafter the petitioner's request, considering his age and health condition of, the tribunal said that it is desirable that he gets the due compensation at the earliest.
"Perusal of the record reveals that, the respondents are driver, owner and insurer of the offending vehicle. None of them is served till date. Advocate for petitioner is not present. If procedure is to be followed, till service of notice to respondents, till their reply and hearing, the present application cannot be decided on merits. Asking petitioner in the above circumstances to follow procedure seems impracticable and unjust," the tribunal noted.
