JIVANLAL N UTTAMCHANDANI Vs. LALMANISINGH RAJBALISINGH & 1

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the aforesaid appeals have arisen out of the same impugned judgment and award passed by learned Tribunal.

(2.) The claimant, by way of preferring First Appeal No.1882 of 2011, inter alia, contended that though the claimant sustained serious injuries over his lower limb and derived permanent disability and his both the legs paralysed and the Doctor has certified disability to the extent of 75% on his lower limb, though learned Tribunal has adopted very conservative view and has awarded compensation, in all, Rs.1, 53, 000/-. It is further contended that learned Tribunal has not appropriately calculated the amount of compensation for permanent disability the claimant has received as well as shock suffering, transportation, attendant, special diet etc and awarded meager amount of compensation. This is the precise contention raised by the original claimant. On the otherhand, the vehicle No.GQC 5386 involved in the accident was not insured and that the insurance company has also challenged the award only contending that the vehicle in question is not involved in the accident and its driver has been acquitted in the criminal offence. Precisely, the defence was of non-involvement of the vehicle in question in the accident. It is further contended that the vehicle involved in accident came to be transferred prior to the date of accident to one Chunilal Keshavlal Teli. Therefore, learned Tribunal could not have passed any award fastening the liability against the owner of the vehicle.

(3.) This Court has heard Mr.Hiren Modi, learned advocate for the appellant in First Appeal No.2006 of 2011 and Mr.S.G.Sharma, learned advocate for the appellant in First Appeal No.1882 of 2011. This Court has also perused the impugned judgment and award passed by learned Tribunal.