BHOOM SHANKER Vs. APSRTC AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, who is injured claimant, aggrieved by the Judgment and decree dated 16.10.2007 in O.P. No. 1578 of 2004 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-III Additional District Judge, (FTC), Nizamabad, preferred this appeal contending that the Tribunal did not properly consider the oral evidence of PWs.1 to 3 and documentary evidence while awarding compensation. It is also contended that the Tribunal ought to have seen that the claimant sustained fracture of left zygomatic, left wall of maxillary sinus and left Medula, laceration on the chin and other multiple injuries all over the body and should have granted compensation as claimed by the claimant and the finding of the Tribunal that the injuries are not grievous is erroneous.

(2.) He further contended that the claimant was an agriculturist and earning Rs. 10,000/- per annum, but the Tribunal without discussing anything about the earnings of the claimant, assessed the income at Rs. 2,000/- per month and awarded compensation of Rs. 37,500/- with interest @ 7.5% per annum, which is erroneous, illegal and liable to be modified.

(3.) On the other hand, the respondents/RTC contended that the Tribunal well considered the oral and documentary evidence and awarded just compensation, since there is no evidence with regard to the income, assessed the income of the claimant at Rs. 2,000/- per month, which is legal, valid and do not suffered with any legal infirmities warranting any interference.