SAIYED LATIFMIYA HUSAINMIYA Vs. MAHAMMADHAFIZ MAHAMMADGANI SHAIKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Advocate Mr.Brijesh Ramanuj appearing for learned Advocate Mr.Ankit Shah on behalf of the appellant, learned Advocate Mr.Sunil Parikh for the respondent No.3 and learned Advocate Mrs.Vasavdatta Bhatt for respondent No.4. No one appears for respondents No.1 and 2.

(2.) By way of this appeal, the appellant challenges the impugned judgement and award dtd. 28/10/2016 passed by the learned 3 rd MAC Tribunal (Auxi.), Mehsana at Visnagar in MACP NO.481 of 2012 (Old No.660/2007), insofar as the same awards a lesser amount to the present appellant as claimant than the amount claimed by the present appellant before the learned Tribunal.

(3.) Learned Advocate Mr.Ramanuj appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the learned Tribunal had erred on three counts. According to the learned Advocate, the learned Tribunal had considered the monthly income of the appellant at the rate of Rs.2,500.00 per month and whereas according to the learned Advocate, the same was much on the lower side, more particularly considering the fact that the present appellant at the relevant point of time was aged 50 years and working as Priest. Learned Advocate would further submit that the second ground on which the enhancement is sought for is that vide Exh.85, the appellant had produced bills for medical expenses and whereas the learned Tribunal, while not reducing any amount from the bills for medical treatment, has wrongly calculated the amount as Rs.3,85,000.00 as against the actual medical bills submitted for Rs.5,54,519.00. Learned Advocate Mr.Ramanuj would submit that again while the bill for transportation which had been submitted to the learned Tribunal vide Exh.81 was for Rs.23,300.00, whereas the learned Tribunal had only awarded an amount of Rs.5,000.00, which also includes special diet charges and attendant charges, and whereas according to the learned Advocate, the learned Tribunal ought to have granted at least the actual expenses incurred by the appellant.