GAURAV GUPTA Vs. MADAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of the present appeal the appellant seeks to challenge the impugned award whereby a meager amount of Rs. 5,500/- has been awarded in favour of appellant. Brief summary of the facts to deal with the contentions of the parties are as under:-On 11. 10. 1993 at about 11:40 pm, Shri Gaurav Gupta was going from Civil lines to Pitampura on motor cycle bearing registration no. DL 1sf 2727 being driven by his friend Shri Shashi Kant on correct side of the road at a slow speed. When they reached near Transport Authority, Rajpur Road, a motadoor bearing registration no. HNG 785 coming from the opposite direction came on the wrong side of the road and hit the motor cycle causing injuries to the appellant and his friend.

(2.) COUNSEL for the appellant contends that the appellant had suffered fracture on his nasal bone due to which he remained hospitalized initially in hindu Rao Hospital w. e. f. 11. 10. 1993 till 12. 10. 1993. The petitioner was not fully recovered after the treatment given to him in Hindu Rao Hospital therefore, he was again admitted in Ganga Ram Hospital for getting further treatment wherein he remained admitted w. e. f. 15. 10. 1993 to 17. 10. 1993. Counsel further contends that the appellant had received a scar on the left side of the nose and eyebrow also, therefore, the appellant was also entitled to be compensated for disfigurement of his face due to scar. Counsel for the appellant further contends that the tribunal has not granted any compensation towards pain and sufferings and has granted a meagre amount towards special diet and conveyance. Counsel further contends that the appellant was doing his bachelors Degree in Arts and he has lost his one precious year due to the said injuries sustained by him.

(3.) PER contra, Ms. Manjusha Wadhwa, counsel for the respondent on the other hand contends that the appellant failed to lead any evidence to prove his entitlement to the grant of the amount of compensation claimed by him in the claim petition. Counsel further contends that in the absence of any evidence led by the appellant still the Tribunal has granted fair and just compensation.