1. Heard learned advocates for the parties and perused the papers on record.
2. The appellant herein has challenged the award dated 12.01.2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Panchmahals at Godhra in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 1472 of 1996 so far as the Tribunal awarded only Rs. 42,100/- as compensation with interest at 9% per annum.
3. It is the case of the appellant that on 05.08.1996 while the appellant was standing on the side of the road, a truck bearing registration no. GJ-17 X 2049 being driven by the original opponent no. 1 in a rash and negligent manner hit the appellant as a result of which the appellant sustained injuries. The appellant therefore filed claim petition seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,50,000/-. The Tribunal after hearing the parties passed the aforesaid award.
4. Mr.
Bukhari, learned advocate appearing for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal failed to take into consideration the entire facts of the case and evidence on record and thereby erred in awarding adequate amount under various heads. He submitted that the Tribunal has wrongly assessed the income of the appellant and the disability.
5. Mr.
Shelat, learned advocate appearing for the respondent insurance company supported the award passed by the Tribunal and submitted that no interference is called for.
6. As a result of hearing and perusal of records, this court is of the view that considering the evidence on record and the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the appellant sustained injuries as a result of the rash and negligent driving of the original opponent no. 1. The Tribunal has assessed the disability of the whole body at 9% which is agreed by both the sides. The Tribunal also assessed the monthly income of the appellant at Rs. 3000/- which is just and proper. Nothing is pointed out before this Court to take a contrary view. The Tribunal has finally quantified the amount of compensation at Rs. 42,100/-. This court is in complete agreement with the reasonings adopted and findings arrived at by the Tribunal and therefore do not see any reason for causing interference.
7. In the premises aforesaid, appeal is dismissed. No costs.
(K.S.
JHAVERI, J.) Divya// Top