[2025:RJ-JP:27296] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 1617/2007 Smt. Gurupyari Satsangi w/o Prem Prakash Satsangi, aged 75 years, r/o. 1 Kha-17, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur ----Claimant/Appellant Versus 1. Satvir Singh s/o Peerumal, r/o Raipur Thana Ram District Sonipat (Haryana) 2. Haryana Rajya Path Parivahan Nigam, jariye parbandhak Sonipat, Depot. ----Non-claimants/Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. K. N. Tiwari on behalf of Mr. R. P. Tiwari For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ishwar Jain HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 22/07/2025 1. The present appeal has been filed by the claimant/appellant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, assailing the impugned award dated 06.11.2006 passed by learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur City, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as "the learned MACT/Tribunal"), in Motor Accident Claims No.1052/2004 (18/97), whereby, the learned Tribunal partly allowed the claim petition filed by the claimant/appellant and awarded a sum of Rs.44,100/- as compensation, along with interest @ 6%, in favour of the claimant/appellant. 2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that on 17.09.1996, the injured claimant/appellant was travelling in Bus bearing registration No.RJ-14-P-4651 from Jaipur to Delhi. When [2025:RJ-JP:27296] (2 of 4) [CMA-1617/2007] the Bus reached near Panchgaon, another Bus coming from opposite direction, bearing registration No.HR-46-281 in a rash and negligent manner at a high speed, which was being driven by its driver, non-claimant/respondent No.1-Satvir Singh, collided with Bus No.RJ-14-P-4651. On account of the said accident, the claimant/appellant sustained various injuries, therefore, the claim petition has been filed with a prayer for awarding just and adequate compensation. 3. Notice of the claim petition was served upon the non- claimant/respondent No.1-Satvir Singh, who filed a reply denying the averments made in the claim petition and prayed for the dismissal of the claim petition. 4. Notice of the claim petition was also issued to non-claimant/respondent No.2-HSRTC who filed a reply on 11.03.1997. Wherein they denied the averments made in the claim petition and stated that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the Bus No.RJ-14-P-4651 owned by the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and not because of the Bus No.HR-46-281 driven by the respondent No.1-Satvir Singh. Therefore, prayed for the dismissal of the claim petition. 5. That on the basis of pleading of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed the following five (5) issues. 6. In order to substantiate the averments made in the claim pe- tition, the claimant/appellant examined Dr. Vishwapriya as AW-1 and appellant as AW-2 and produced documents (Ex-1 to Ex-18). 7. In rebuttal, non-claimants/respondents did not led any evidence. [2025:RJ-JP:27296] (3 of 4) [CMA-1617/2007] 8. After hearing arguments from the learned counsels for the both the parties, the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the claim and, awarded a sum of Rs.44,100/- as compensation in favour of the claimant/appellant. 9. That being aggrieved of the impugned award dated 06.11.2006, the claimant/appellant has preferred present Appeal for enhancement of the compensation. 10. The learned counsel for the claimant/appellant contended that the learned Tribunal seriously erred in awarding an inadequate amount of compensation to the appellant, therefore, he prayed a suitable modification of the impugned award. 11. Per contra, learned counsel for the non-claimants/respondents supported the impugned award and vehemently opposed the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the claimant/appellant. He submitted that the learned Tribunal, after due consideration of facts and law, awarded a just and proper compensation. He further submitted that the impugned award is based on a correct appreciation of facts and law, and therefore, the appeal filed by the appellant may kindly be dismissed. 12. Heard and considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record. 13. From a bare perusal of the record, it is reflected that the claimant/appellant sustained injuries in the accident, the learned Tribunal carefully considered all reasonable aspects while awarding compensation. The learned Tribunal also considered that the injured suffered various injuries and permanent disability to the [2025:RJ-JP:27296] (4 of 4) [CMA-1617/2007] extent of 1.99% and awarded compensation of Rs.44,100/- along with interest at 6% per annum. From perusal of the impugned award, it is also reflected that the impugned award reveals no illegality or infirmity that would warrant interference by this Court. 14. Accordingly, the present is devoid of merit, hence, dismissed. 15. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J Seema/29