HITESH PURUSHOTTAMBHAI KANITKAR Vs. ASHOK SAVAILAL DHOLAKIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri C.H. Vora, learned counsel for the appellant; none for the respondents though served.

(2.) The appellant, being partly aggrieved by the award dated 8.6.88 passed by the learned Member, M.A.C.Tribunal [Aux.] Kutchchh at Bhuj, is before this Court with a prayer for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. As none appears for the other side, I will presume that the correctness of the findings relating to the accident, rashness, negligence and liability of the respondents is not under challenge.

(3.) Shri Vora, learned counsel for the appellant, after taking me through the evidence submits that present is a case where a young boy of 15 years suffered multiple fractures of tibia and fibula and had to undergo pain, shock and suffering for long many months; the Tribunal was unjustified in awarding a sum of Rs. 9,000/- only under the head of pain, shock and suffering. He also submits that the Tribunal erred in not awarding the attendance charges and also erred in awarding a sum of Rs. 1,000/- towards medicine and special diet, specially in case like present where the facts would show that the insured had suffered for long time and had to go on special diet.