LAWS(ALL)-2007-4-113

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD Vs. RAJ AMITENDRA JAIN

Decided On April 23, 2007
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY Appellant
V/S
RAI AMITENDRA JAIN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ACCORDING to the appellant-Insurance Company fixation of compensation amount has to be made on the basis of 70% disablement. The other points are already settled. Therefore, he is only confined his argument on this point. Sri Vivek Kumar Birla learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended before this Court that the concerned Doctor was examined before the Tribunal who said that disability of the right leg of the injured was 70% and not 90%, which had been alleged. From the observations of the Tribunal concerned, it appears that the Tribunal considered such part of the evidence but ultimately on the basis of an example of paralysis in the reported case of 1997 (8) SSC 349 (Nagesha v. M. S. Krishna and another)and on the basis of an example of permanent disablement reported in 1999 (3) TAC 647 (Deepak Agnihotri v. Jai Bhan and another) fixed the amount of compensation of rs. 5 lakhs. However, by an interim order, a sum of Rs. 3 lakhs was directed to be withdrawn by the claimants.

(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the claimants contended before this Court that if the case of the claimants is considered by calling him to be present in the Court physically or by adopting an appropriate method of test, it will certainly show that the compensation awarded by the Court below was correctly determined.

(3.) MR. Birla brought our attention to the second Schedule provided under Section 163-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the M. V. Act, 1988)to show that in the case of notional income how the compensation will be determined.