MONI DENIEL Vs. USHA RAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Advocate Mr. Hakim for appellant original claimant.

(2.) By filing this appeal, appellant original claimant has challenged award made by MACT (Main) Vadodara in MACP No. 699 of 1988 Ext. 46 decided on 1st November, 1992. Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs. 75,800.00 in favour of claimant with 12 per cent interest from date of claim petition. In this appeal, appellant is praying for enhancement thereof.

(3.) Learned Advocate Mr. Hakim for appellant submitted that looking to nature of injury caused to appellant, amount of compensation which has been awarded by Claims Tribunal is on its lower side. He submitted that in accident, appellant has received injury on right eye and other parts of body and she has lost total vision of right eye which has been considered to be 50 per cent disability by Claims Tribunal as per medical certificate given by Dr. Kadam at Ext. 43. Learned Advocate Mr. Hakim for appellant submitted that Claims Tribunal has not properly appreciated that lady claimant having young age of 23 years at the time of accident when accident occurred and she was unmarried at that time which ought to have been taken into consideration by Claims Tribunal while awarding compensation in favour of claimant. He submitted that her marriage prospects has been adversely affected and appellant has suffered disfigurement and also disability which has to be suffered by appellant till end of her life and it may happen that because of injury received on right eye, it may also adversely affect left eye in future. So, these are the circumstances which ought to have been kept in mind by Claims Tribunal at the time of working out compensation which has lost sight by Claims Tribunal and, therefore, amount of Rs. 75,800.00 awarded by Claims Tribunal is not just, reasonable, adequate and proper and, therefore, interference of this Court is necessary. He submitted that claimants are claiming Rs. 1,20,000.00 by way of this appeal.