GUNDALA MALLAMMA Vs. T ANKA PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Alleging that she, while travelling in a tractor and trailor bearing No.AAK 5442 and AAK 7756 along with others, a Lorry bearing No.AAT 5853 belonging to the first respondent and insured with second respondent, being driven in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the trailor resulting in injuries and consequent permanent disability to her appellant, filed a claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- from the respondents. First respondent chose to remain ex parte both before the Tribunal and in this Court. Second respondent contested the claim petition by filing a counter. In support of her case, appellant examined herself as P.W.I and marked Exs.A1 to A4. No oral evidence was adduced by 2nd respondent but Ex. B1 was marked by consent on its behalf. The Tribunal having held that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the lorry of the first respondent, awarded Rs.2,000/- as compensation to the appellant. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded to her, claimant preferred this appeal seeking enhanced compensation.

(2.) The point for consideration is to what compensation is the appellant entitled to?

(3.) The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that since Ex.A4 shows that appellant suffered fracture to her ribs apart from a lacerated injury to her upper lip, compensation of Rs.2,000.00 awarded by the Tribunal is too meager.