These appeals are directed against the common judgment and award dated 21st October 2000 passed by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,(Aux.I), Rajkot at Gondal in MAC Petitions Nos.319 of 1998 to 321 of 1998 that have been filed by the claimants. 2 The short facts of the present case are to the effect that all the claimants were travelling in Maruti CarNo.GJ 3 K 9395 on 9th February 1998 from Gondal to Amreli for the purpose of attending a marriage ceremony. It is the case of the claimants that the driver of the said maruti car was driving the same in a negligent and rash manner because of which it dashed against a bridge near village Lunka. It is the case of the claimants that because of the said accident all of them have sustained injuries and therefore they have filed respective claim petitions. Claim Petition No.319 of 1998 was filed by Pravinaben claiming for compensation of Rs.2 lakhs. Claim Petition No.320 of 1998 was filed by Ranjanben claiming for getting compensation of Rs.4 lakhs whereas Claim Petition No.321 of 1998 was filed by one Swatiben claiming total compensation of Rs.3 lakhs.
3 The Tribunal after considering the evidence on record has awarded Rs.1,17,500 to the claimant of MAC Petition No.319 of 1998 as against her claim of Rs.2 lakhs, Rs.81,100 to the claimant of MAC Petition No.320 of 1998 as against her claim of Rs.4 lakhs and Rs.2,27,360 to the claimant of MAC Petition No.321 of 1998 as against her claim of Rs.3 lakhs.
4 The appellant – original opponent No.3 – Insurance Company has challenged the said common judgment and award by filing these appeals. First Appeal No.865 of 2001 arises out of MAC Petition No.319 of 1998, First Appeal No.866 of 2001 arises out of MAC Petition No.320 of 1998 and First Appeal No.867 of 2001 arises out of MAC Petition No.321 of 1998.
5 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6 It has been the consistent practice of this Court not to enter into the merits of those appeals wherein the claim in appeal is a petty claim, and claims up to Rs.50,000/- have been quantified by this Court as petty claims. No question of law or principle is urged. Hence, First Appeals Nos.865 and 866 of 2001 are dismissed without entering into the merits of the matter on the ground that they represent a petty claim.
7 As far as First Appeal No.867 of 2001, the claimant therein had suffered closed fracture of shaft femur and she had to be operated twice for inserting rods in her legs. Because of the injury sustained by her, her leg was shortened by one centimeter and she had also sustained fracial injuries. The doctor has assessed her permanent partial whole body disability at 22%. As the injured was minor at the time of the accident and had no income, the Tribunal assessed a notional income of Rs.1500 per month and as she sustained whole body disability of 22%, her loss of future income was determined at Rs.330 per month and Rs.3960 per year. Considering the age of the applicant, the Tribunal awarded 16 multiplier and granted Rs.63,360 towards future economic loss. Over and above the same, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.75,000 towards medical expenses, Rs.40,000 towards pain, shock and suffering, Rs.25,000 toward loss of marriage prospects, Rs.5,000 each under the heads of expenses for spacial diet, transportation expenses and attendant charges and Rs.9,000 towards actual loss of income. Thus, in all, a sum of Rs.2,27,360 was awarded to the claimant of MAC Petition No.321 of 1998.
8 I am in complete agreement with the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. The appeal has no merits and the same is devoid of any merits. Hence, the same is dismissed.
(K.S.Jhaveri, J.) *mohd