SURESH @ SURESH KUMAR Vs. KANAKA RAJ AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the petitioner in O.P.(MV) No.277 of 2006, on the files of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') Neyyattinkara. He filed the above application under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation for the bodily injuries suffered by him in a road traffic accident.

(2.) According to him, the said accident arose out of the use of the offending vehicle owned by the 1st respondent, driven by the additional 3rd respondent and insured with the 2nd respondent at the time of accident and the accident was caused by the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by the additional 3rd respondent. He claimed an amount of Rs. 9,00,000/-, as compensation for the injuries suffered by him and the consequential disablement thereunder.

(3.) The 2nd respondent Insurance Company opposed the said application, disputing the quantum of compensation claimed under various heads and the cause of accident alleged in the petition. But, admitted that the offending vehicle was covered under the insurance policy issued by them to the 1st respondent at the time of accident. After considering the evidence produced by both parties, the Tribunal had passed the impugned award granting Rs. 4,82,000/- as compensation to the appellant. The inadequacy of the quantum of compensation determined under various heads of claim is challenging in this appeal.