Bombay High CourtFA/1716/2014disposed offdismissed for default

Jaiprakash Chudaman Waghmare v. Vithal Narsingrao Jadhav

2015-09-21Hon'Ble Shri Justice S V Gangapurwala2 pages

fa1716-14 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO.1716 OF 2014 Jaiprakash s/o Chudaman Waghmare Age 37 years, Occ-Service as Junior Asst.

in Z.P. Nanded, r/o Wachmannagar CIDCO, Nanded, Tq. & Dist.Nanded .. APPELLANT [Orig.Respondent]

Versus

Vithal s/o Narsingrao Jadhav Age 41 years, Occ-Labour R/o Malhar Nagar, Kandhar Tq. Kandhar, Dist.Nanded.

.. RESPONDENTS [Orig.Petr.] ...

Shri S.B.Ghatol Patil,Adv. for appellant Shri G.G.SuryawanshiAdv.for respondent.

...

CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.

DATED : 21ST SEPTEMBER, 2015 ORAL ORDER :- Mr.Ghatol Patil, learned counsel submits that while passing award u/s 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as the M.V.Act for short), the existence of permanent disability is a sinequo-none, without existence of permanent disability provisions of Section 140 of M.V.Act cannot be invoked. According to the learned counsel in the present case, there is no permanent disability, as such provisions of Section 140 of M.V.Act are not applicable. 2] Mr.Suryawanshi, learned counsel submits that the certificate of

fa1716-14 -2permanent disability is produced on record. 20% permanent disability has been suffered by the claimant. The award is rightly passed. 3] There cannot be any debate with the proposition that while considering application u/s 140 of M.V.Act, existence of permanent disability is a must. Perusing the impugned order, the Court has observed that the petitioner has produced disability certificate FormCom-B which shows that he has sustained 20% permanent disability. The injury certificate also shows fracture and minimal displaced tibia. The injury is described as grievous injury. The Court has relied on the permanent disability certificate produced on record to the extent of 20%.

4] Considering the above, I am not inclined to entertain the present appeal. Even otherwise while passing an order u/s 166 of M.V.Act, existence of permanent disability is not a sine-quo-none, the injury suffered is sufficient. If Court ultimately comes to the conclusion that the claimant had not suffered permanent disability, then the amount awarded while passing award u/s 140 of the M.V.Act can be adjusted at that time. Considering the above, present appeal is disposed of. No costs.

5] In view of disposal of Appeal, the claimant would be entitled to withdraw the amount deposited however the same would be subject to the final orders that would be passed by the tribunal u/s 166 of the M.V.Act. In view of disposal of Appeal, Civil Applications disposed of. [S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.] umg/