UDAYAN C.K. Vs. SHIVA KUMAR & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has come up for admission today. With the consent of learned Counsel for appellant as well as contesting respondent/insurance company the same is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) The admitted facts in this appeal are that appellant herein is claimant in. M.V.C. No. 908/1995 on the file M.A.C.T-IV, Mangalore, D.K. The said claim petition was filed seeking compensation for the injuries said to have suffered by claimant in an accident involving lorry bearing No.MEG 5257 driven by him and another lorry bearing No.MEC 6336 coming from the opposite direction. The fact that accident said to have taken place on 25.11.1994 at about 10.25 a.m., near Valachil in Addyar village on NH.48 is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that claimant was driver of lorry bearing No.MEG 5257. It is further not in dispute that in the said accident he has suffered injuries resulting in fracture of left femur mid shaft, lacerated wound on scalp, left shoulder, left wrist, right leg and other minor injuries. For which he is treated as inpatient in Mangalore Nursing Home from 25.11.1994 till 9.12.1994. It is further not in dispute that said facts have come on record by way of evidence of claimant as PW.1 and that of Doctor, who treated him as PW.2. The documents with regard to accident and as well as treatment meted out to him for the injuries suffered by him in the said accident are on record in the form of Exs.P-1 to P-10. The Tribunal on appreciation of pleadings, oral and documentary evidence referred to above proceeded to allow claim petition awarding compensation to claimant as under: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_266_LAWS(KAR)9_2011.htm</FRM> Claimant being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation has come up in this appeal seeking enhancement of same.

(3.) After hearing the counsel for appellant and as well as contesting respondent/insurance company and on perusal of the finding of Tribunal in the judgment impugned and as well as copies of documents which are furnished to this Court by the counsel for appellant it is seen that there is error on the part of Tribunal in assessing material evidence available on record so far as awarding compensation to claimant. The award of compensation to claimant under the head pain and suffering at Rs. 25,000.00, attendant charges at Rs. 5,000.00 and medical expenses at Rs. 8,000.00 appears to be just and proper. However, the compensation awarded towards loss of income during the period of treatment and for discomfort and loss of amenities at Rs. 5,000.00 each is on lower side.