KANAGAM SATYA NARAYANA Vs. THATA EESWARARAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the claimant who had filed a claim petition in WC No. 190 of 1997 before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Assistant Commissioner of Labour-I, Guntur seeking compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- for the injuries he sustained in a motor accident. The appellant was working as a driver on lorry bearing No. ADT 4007 belonging to first respondent and in the course of employment, on 20.9.1996 an accident took place, as a result the appellant sustained injuries, and he was admitted in Government Hospital at Vijayawada for treatment. He claimed that he was aged 40 years and earning monthly salary of Rs. 2,000/- at the time of accident.

(2.) First respondent-owner remained ex parte, whereas second respondent-insurance company defended the claim of the appellant by denying the age, wages and extent of injuries as claimed by the appellant. Before the learned Commissioner, the appellant examined himself as AW-I and doctor as AW-II and no oral or documentary evidence was led on behalf of respondents.

(3.) AW-II, the doctor who was working at Government Hospital, Vijayawada from February, 1996 gave evidence on the basis of record maintained in the said hospital relating to the appellant. He stated that the appellant was admitted in the hospital on 22.9.1996 with injury on left thigh and he sustained fracture of left thigh bone in the upper 1/3rd and middle third junction. He was operated on 28.9.1996 and IM nailing of left femur was done and he was discharged on 18.10.1996. The doctor stated that the fracture got united, but stiffness was present and X-ray dated 25.8.2001 shows union of fracture with rod inside. The doctor stated that the appellant is not able to sit and squat as a normal person, he may feel difficulty to get in and get out of the cabin of the lorry and he cannot sit for a long time and may feel difficulty to work as a driver. The disability estimated is 25% and it is permanent partial in nature.