JAYANTIBHAI CHHAGANBHAI PATEL Vs. MAGANBHAI CHHAGANBHAI NAYAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The injured claimant has challenged the judgment dtd. 11/6/2007 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxi.) Vyara, District Surat in MACP No.387 of 1991.

(2.) Mr. Paresh Darji, learned advocate for the appellant referring to the facts of the case submitted that evidence had come on record that the claimant had suffered multiple fracture injuries in both the legs and hands. He was admitted in the hospital and steel rods and plates were inserted in both the legs and hand. Mr. Darji stated that he was operated for about seven times on his leg, but the learned Tribunal has not appropriately granted amount under the head of pain, shock and suffering. 2.1 Advocate Mr. Darji further submitted that the income of the claimant has been considered as Rs.4,000.00 per month, but the prospective rise in income has not been granted in accordance to the judgment of the Apex Court, taking into consideration the age of the claimant. Mr. Darji submitted that the bills regarding medical expenses were placed on record and in total the medical bills produced were to the tune of Rs.1,22,593.00, but the Tribunal has not believed the same considering to be as not proved and granted Rs.25,000.00 under the head of medical treatment and medicines. 2.2 Advocate Mr. Darji stated that production of the document on record couple with the fact that claimant himself had undergone treatment with various Doctors and bills from Viniktam Nursing Home of Dr. Shirish M.Desai were consented to be exhibited by the Insurance Company, and, thus there was no ground to doubt the medical bills produced by the claimant.

(3.) Advocate Mr. G.C. Mazmudar submitted that the Tribunal has considered the facts on record and has also relied upon the documentary evidence, and in view of the same, the Tribunal has considered the disability of 15% for the body as a whole, and accordingly considering the income of Rs.4,000.00, has assessed future loss of income, which is just and proper. 3.1 Advocate Mr. Mazmudar submitted that the amount under head of pain, shock and suffering is also sufficiently granted, and the medical bills which were believed by the Tribunal has been considered in the compensation amount, thus, submitted that no indulgence of this Court is called for.