SYED RAHAMATHULLA S/O SYED ZALEEL SAB Vs. SMT. NOORUNNISA BEGUM W/O M. AYUSKHAN, PROP. ATS TRANSPORTS AND NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT is the claimant, being unsatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Bangalore (the Tribunal' for short), dated 16 -11 -2006 made in MVC No. 5581/2005 filed this appeal seeking for enhancement of the compensation.

(2.) THE claimant has contended that on 6 -3 -2005 when he was travelling in a bus bearing registration KA -07/3738 on Chintamani -Bangalore Road at about 11.00 a.m., near Hosakote cross, when he was about the get down from the said bus, the driver of the said bus without signal from the conductor moved the bus in a high speed and in the negligent manner, due to which, the claimant fell down from the bus and the rear wheel of the bus ran over the left leg of the claimant. Immediately, he was shifted to the hospital. He has sustained degloving of skin of left thigh and leg. Due to the said injury, he had to be in the hospital for more than 25 days and suffered disability. He contended that he is aged about 46 years and doing business in silk vending and rearing and due to the accident, he has suffered huge loss in the business and sought for compensation of Rs. 6,00,000/ -.

(3.) THE claimant being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal filed this appeal contending that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is very meager. Though he was doing the business of silk vending, the Tribunal has taken his income at Rs. 3,000/ - p.m. against his claim of Rs. 10,000/ - p.m. The Appellant has claimed the medical expenses of Rs. 1,50,000/ - and submitted the bills for Rs. 85,425/ -, however, the Tribunal has awarded only Rs. 65,000/ - towards medical expenditure. The Appellant further contended that the compensation awarded insofar as loss of amenities is contrary to law. Though the Doctor who has examined him has assessed the disability to the extent of 30% of the lower limb and 10% to the whole body, the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards loss of future income, hence the Appellant has sought for enhancement of the compensation.