(1.) Appeal has already been admitted. Advocates heard. Record of the Tribunal and its award perused.
(2.) Appellant was travelling on his moped M.80. Passenger Bus No. M.O.U. 0077 dashed the moped injuring the appellant. Manoharlal (R-1), bus driver, was prosecuted under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code. The Tribunal has held the bus driver guilty of negligent. It has held bus owner and the Insurance Company liable to pay compensation. On these points there has been no contest between the parties in this appeal.
(3.) Controversy is confined as to quantum of compensation. Appellant has suffered multiple abrasions on his left fore-arm, swelling and deformity on right hip with suspected fracture vide the M.L.C. report, Ex. P4. As per x-ray report Ex. P4, fracture of left shaft of radius was noted. Appellant was treated at Jaora Civil Hospital where he remained admitted for 18 days. A plaster was put and treatment had continued for six months as per the deposition of Satyanarayan (A.W. 1). Appellant has claimed that he has spent Rs. 30,000 - 35,000, in treatment, Rs. 4,000-5,000 in special diet and Rs. 5,000-6,000 as costs of attendant as his mother and brother had also been with him while he was admitted in the hospital. As per Ex. P/9, he remained admitted in hospital between 31.3.2001 to 3.4.2001 that is for 4 days. He has submitted vouchers Exs. P/11 to P/14 for an amount of Rs. 130 being x-ray fees, x-ray plates Exs. P/1 8, P/1 3 and P/16 have been submitted. Dr. S.K. Varun, (A.W. 1) Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Jaora, has supported him partially. According to him, the appellant remained admitted for a week and his hand was put to plaster for 11/2 months. Dr. S.K. Varun (A.W. 1 )had noted disability of 5% but in Para 5 he has admitted that such fracture had united within 3 months and the patient could resume to his normal work. In para 7 he has admitted that the fracture was fully united. From the statements of Satyanarayan (A.W. 2) and Dr. S.K. Varun (A.1) no permanent diminution in earning capacity of the appellant has been proved. However, that is not the end of the matter. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 2,000 as medical expnses, Rs. 1,000 for special diet, Rs. 5,000 for mental and physical pain and suffering, Rs. 6,000 for loss of earning for three months during which the appellant was fully disabled and was under treatment and Rs. 10,000 for permanent disability with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. When considered as a whole the compensation awarded by the Tribunal below has neither been too excessive nor too less. No interference is warranted. Appeal dismissed. Costs as incurred.