SAHDEV Vs. KALEEM MANSOORI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed by the claimant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award dated 31/10/2003, passed by Additional MACT Sendhwa, in claim case No.65/2002. By impugned award, the Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.1,80,000/- with interest to the claimant for the injuries sustained by appellant. According to claimant, the compensation awarded is on lower side and hence, need to be enhanced. It is for the enhancement in the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed this appeal. So the question that arises for consideration is whether any case for enhancement in compensation awarded by the Tribunal on facts / evidence adduced is made out in the compensation awarded and if so to what extent

(2.) It is not necessary to narrate the entire facts in detail, such as how the accident occurred, who was negligent in driving the offending vehicle, who is liable for paying compensation etc. It is for the reason that firstly all these findings are recorded in favour of claimants by the Tribunal. Secondly, none of these findings though recorded in claimants' favour are under challenge at the instance of any of the respondents such as owner/driver or insurance company either by way of cross appeal or cross objection. In this view of the matter, there is no justification to burden the judgment by detailing facts on all these issues.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was aged 28 years and was driver at the time of accident, which took place at Nasik on 16/05/2002. Appellant sustained injuries in his left eye and also head injuries. Apart from this appellant sustained fracture of femur bone in his right leg. Appellant was hospitalized at Nasik from 16/05/2002 to 17/05/2002. Thereafter from 14/08/2002 to 05/10/2002, at Gwalior. Appellant was operated, rod was inserted. Appellant lost vision of one eye. Disfiguration took place. It is submitted that learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.1,80,000/-, for which no breakup was given. Learned counsel submits that it is a case of 100% disability and also disfiguration. It is further submitted that the amount awarded is on lower side.