High CourtsSingle Bench(2013) 07 RAJ CK 0150

Devi Sahai vs Hari Singh and Others

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 23 July 2013

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bela M. Trivedi, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 6836 of 2011

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 312 words

Bela M. Trivedi, J.—The present appeal has bee filed by the appellant-claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ajmer (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in claim case No. 583/10, whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,06,500/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization, for the injuries sustained by the appellant in the alleged accident. It has been submitted by learned counsel Mr. Ram Singh Rathore for the appellant that though the appellant had sustained fractures, and suffered partial disability to the extent of 5.90%, the Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the head of loss of income. He also submitted that the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate, considering the disability suffered by the appellant.

2.

It appears that the appellant-claimant had sustained injuries as a result of the accident, caused on 03.06.2010, when the appellant was walking on the road and when the offending truck driven by the respondent No. 1, hit the appellant. The appellant having filed the claim petition, the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 40,000/- for the injuries sustained by him and for the nutritious food. The Tribunal has also awarded Rs. 40,000/- for actual medical expenses, Rs. 38,320/- for the loss of income, and also Rs. 4800/- for other expenses. Accordingly the Tribunal has awarded in all Rs. 1,06,500/- by way of compensation for the injuries sustained by him. The Court does not find any substance in the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate. On the contrary, the Tribunal has awarded more than just compensation. In that view of the matter the Court does not find any substance in the appeal and the same deserves to be dismissed, which is accordingly dismissed.