KAMRUDDIN RAJABALI KHOJA Vs. KHIMJI HATHUJI JADEJA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under Sec. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 arising out of the judgment and award dtd. 14/8/2018 rendered by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary), Bhuj (the Tribunal) in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 815 of 1998 (claim petition), whereby, the Tribunal was pleased to award compensation of Rs.3,29,200.00 with running interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of claim petition till realization against the claim of Rs.10.00 lakh with interest and cost made by the appellant - original claimant towards the injuries sustained by him. Accordingly, the appellant - claimant has preferred this appeal for enhancement of compensation.

(2.) Facts, briefly stated, are that on 30/5/1998, the appellant - claimant was going from Anjar bus station to the Anjar city walking on the left side of the road, and at around 14:30 hours, when he reached near the traffic point opposite to the Anjar bus station, the respondent No. 1, came from behind with a luxury bus bearing registration No. GJ-17-T-1826 in excessive speed and lost control over the bus and dashed with the applicant from behind and the bus ran over the applicant, resulting into applicant's sustaining serious injuries.

(3.) The petition is filed, inter alia, raising the ground that the appellant - claimant was a Petition Writer and had suffered 45% functional disability for the body as a whole, while he had suffered eight fractures and about eight injuries. It is submitted by learned advocate Mr. Hemal Shah for the appellant that the appellant had sustained 34% permanent physical disability of the right side limb, which was assessed by Dr. P. G. Doshi vide Certificate produced at Exh. 54, whereas, Dr. Rajendra B. Trivedi had assessed 22% disability of the head injury. It is submitted by the learned advocate for the appellant that the claimant - injured was admitted in various hospitals for treatment and had undergone lot of pain and sufferings. He submitted that the amount under the head of Pain, Shock and Suffering is on the lower side, which is not considered in proportion to the injuries sustained and the hospitalization and a long period of treatment. It is also submitted that during the treatment period, the appellant - claimant was attended by the family members and also an extra attendant was needed; further the appellant - claimant was also required to have special diet because of consistent treatment at various hospitals, as an indoor as well as outdoor patient. Further, the appellant - claimant had to expend after transportation, however, the Tribunal has not properly awarded the amount, though evidence was produced on record.