ANIL KUMAR Vs. ROHTASH SINGH & ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard learned counsels of either party, it transpires that the accident occurred on 18.08.2005, when the claimant Mr. Anil Kumar was driving the Jeep under the employment of vehicle owner. Such vehicle met an accident causing the fracture in the elbow of one of the Arms of the Driver/claimant. He was 25 years' of age at the time of accident. So, having remained hospitalized for 19 days', he was declared to have suffered the injuries to make him 48 percent disabled. He, under Section 167 of Motor Vehicles Act, chose to file the claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, which was adjudicated by learned Trial Judge on 11.12.2008, awarding the compensation to the tune of Rs.1,79,694/-.

(2.) Feeling aggrieved, he has come up before this Court in this appeal.

(3.) The main contention of learned counsel is that the petition was filed choosing the option, under Section 167 of M.V. Act before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal but the calculation of the award has been made on the principles and rules, as laid down in the Workmen Compensation Act. So, this finding of the Tribunal is erroneous.