NAFISA ABDUL KUMBHAR Vs. LAXMANRAV P. CHITTODO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Dhomse submitted that it is a case of minor injured, aged about 9 years who had suffered 68% permanent neurological disability and Dr. Paresh Mody, M.S. Neurosurgeon has certified the disability. The injured claimant was treated conservatively and on examination, Mr. Dhomse submitted that the neurosurgeon has made an observation with regard to disability to assess it as 68%.

(2.) Countering the same, Advocate Mr. Krunal Saksena contended that the applicant had filed a purshis at Exh.39 to consider the disability as 17% for the body as a whole and though the insurance company had not accepted the said also, now it would not be appropriate for the claimant to pray for 68% disability where no further proof has been given as observed by the Tribunal of any continuous disability. Thus, Mr. Saksena submitted that the yardstick laid down in the case of Master Mallikarjun Vs. Divisional Manager, The National Insurance Company Limited & Anr., reported in AIR 2014 SC 736 as referred by the Tribunal could be adopted so that the injured claimant could be considered as being reasonably compensated.

(3.) The facts of the case suggest that on 7/10/2007, the minor claimant was on the road along with her relative Hamilaben as pedestrian and they were proceeding on left hand side on the road with due care. Suddenly opponent no.1 came from the rear side with Bolero car bearing registration no.GJ-12 Y- 1303 driving recklessly and negligently in an excessive speed without observing the road rules, on the wrong side and collided with the minor applicant who sustained injury owing to the accident.