UTTAM KUMAR SAHA Vs. SUJIT NANDI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the claimant is directed against the award dated 26.08.2010 passed by the learned of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Tripura, Agartala in T.S(MAC) No. 194 of 2007 whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,00,807/ - along with interest @ 6% per annum to the claimant under the following heads:

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts of the case are that the claimant was working as a Cook with the BSF. While he was on vacation and had visited his native place at Tripura he met with an accident on 25.12.2006. He was hit by Auto bearing No. TR -01 -K -0420. He was immediately taken to the G. B.P. Hospital at Agartala. He was admitted in the hospital on 25.12.2006 and was discharged therefrom on 12.03.2007 i.e. after 76 days. Thereafter the claimant did not recover and he was readmitted in the Hospital at Agartala on 22nd May, 2007 and remained admitted there till 18th June, 2007 for a period of 28 days. Again the claimant did not recover and within 12 days he was again admitted on 30th June, 2007 and discharged on 3rd August, 2007 i.e. after 35 days. Basically the claimant was virtually immobile from 25.12.2006 till 3rd August, 2007. It appears that thereafter the claimant started working but he again developed problems arising out of the injuries and on 20.03.2009 he was admitted at the Gujarmal Modi Hospital & Research Centre for Medical Sciences, Delhi (for short the G.M. Modi Hospital, Delhi). He remained there for 21 days from 23rd March, 2009 to 13th April, 2009. Major operation was performed on the claimant and he also had to undergo plastic surgery. Thereafter the claimant was again admitted in the G.M. Modi Hospital, Delhi on 14.07.2009 and he remained admitted there for seven days till 21.07.2009 for follow up treatment. Unfortunately, the treatment did not end there and he was again admitted on 16.12.2009 and discharged on 24.12.2009 i.e. he remained in hospital for another 8(eight) days and that time the income of the claimant was about Rs. 16,000/ - per month. Thereafter a Medical Board of the BSF met and assessed his disability at 83%. The learned tribunal rejected this disability certificate only on the ground that it is not by a disability Board constituted by the Government.

(3.) DURING the course of this appeal the claimant has filed an application for leading additional evidence. The documents which the claimant wants to file are all documents issued by the BSF. There can be no doubt with regard to their genuineness and therefore, I accept the same, allow the application and admit the documents in evidence and they are read in evidence for the purpose of assessing the compensation.