MALA PARKAL Vs. SHAIK HAIDER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the claimant in O.P. No.230 of 1989 under Sec. 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short 'the Act') in a personal injury claim case claiming compensation at Rs.1,00,000/- which was resisted by the 1st respondent, the owner of the lorry APT 9987, and the 2nd respondent-the insurer and after an enquiry, the claim conceded to the extent of Rs.61,600/- and aggrieved by that an inadequate, this appeal is filed.

(2.) It is found by the Tribunal that the claimant, a lady aged 32 years at the relevant time, a teacher by profession, was involved in a motor vehicle accident while she was travelling as a pillion rider on a scooter, which was hit by lorry AP 9987 from behind the scooter and that it was due to rash and negligent driving of the lorry by the driver. It was also found that the claimant had sustained serious injuries leaving a disability at 45 percent, lost the marital life and opportunity of pregnancy and was unable to perform her duties temporarily but continuing as a teacher, and therefore, the Tribunal awarded the compensation as follows:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_646_ALT3_1997Html1.htm</FRM> It is contended on behalf of the claimant that with the evidence on record regarding the injuries suffered by the claimant leading to disability as above and the medical and other expenses and the loss of income, there was no reason to reduce the compensation so claimed from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.61,600/-. On behalf of the 2nd respondent-insurer it is contended that judging the award in any manner the amount so awarded cannot be said to be inadequate and at any rate it cannot be termed as unjust.

(3.) The items of compensation awarded by the Tribunal may not be scientific or proper. However, that can be tested with the materials on record with reference to the distinct and specific items of compensation which can be awarded in a personal injury claim case viz.,