JAFAR KHAN Vs. HASAN KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Assailing the award dated 23rd March, 2007 passed by the 7th Additional Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur in Claim Case No. 224/2006 on the point of inadequacy of the compensation, the injured appellant has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for an accident took place on 13th March, 2006 in which he sustained injuries over head and having fracture on fronto-temporal region. The appellant had filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 14,75,0000/- for the injuries sustained by him. The Claims Tribunal awarded total sum of Rs. 2,02,838/-. Out of which Rs. 97,838/- in medical expenses, Rs. 1,000/- in pain and suffering, Rs. 1,000/- for maintenance, Rs. 1,000/- for conveyance, Rs. 60,000/- for disability, Rs. 36,000/- for loss of wages of three years and future loss of earning and Rs. 5,000/- due to nonappearance in the examination.

(2.) When the matter was taken up for hearing on 14th December, 2011 the appellant was present in the Court. Considering all the documents which are available it was directed that he may be examined by the doctors of the Jabalpur Hospital from the head of the department of the Orthopedic as well as the Opthalmology and report be submitted indicating the functional disability. The report has been received but in the said report functional disability to the injured has been specified stating the fact that in the right eye there is total optic atrophy. As per the certificate of permanent disability Ext. P/253 the doctor has opined the disability to the extent of 30%+30%. The statement of doctor has also been recorded in this regard in the Court. The Claims Tribunal recorded a finding of disability to the extent of 30% in the right eye accepting the said certificate of permanent disability. In the said context it is to be decided that what is the percentage of the disability looking to the injuries received to the injured. Moreso how many compensation can be awarded in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(3.) Shri Ravish Deolia, learned Counsel for the appellant, contends that it is a case of total loss of right eye and also having some effect on the left eye, however, treating it to be a case of loss of vision of one eye, just and reasonable amount of compensation may be awarded.