PIYUSH Vs. MAHENDRA KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CASE is listed for orders on IA No. 1380/08 which is application for dispensing with service of respondents No. 1 and 2. Learned counsel for appellant prays for dispensing with services of respondents No. 1 and 2. Application is allowed. Services of respondents No. 1 and 2 are dispensed with.

(2.) ALSO heard on IA No. 10701/07 which is application for condonation of delay. There is delay of 503 days. Appellant is minor. It is a case of gross negligence on the part of guardian of the appellant in filing the appeal with inordinate delay for which appellant cannot be allowed to suffer, therefore in view of the fact that interest of minor is involved, the application is allowed and delay is condoned.

(3.) THIS is an appeal filed by the claimant under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act by the claimant against an award dated 3.3.2006 passed by I MACT, Indore in Claim Case No. 59/2004. By the impugned award, the Claims Tribunal has assessed the compensation as Rs. 13,264/ - by way of compensation for the injury which appellant sustained in an accident but awarded a sum of Rs. 6,632/ - on account of contributory negligence. According to the claimant i.e. appellant herein, the compensation awarded is on lower side and hence, needs to be enhanced. 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 compensation awarded and if so to what extent?