AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N. Ananda, J.—This is a claimant''s appeal for enhancement of compensation.
Heard Smt. H.C. Kavitha, learned Counsel for claimant and Sri Ismail, learned Counsel for Insurance Company.
As per wound certificate produced by claimant, he had suffered following injuries:
1) An incised wound about 2" in length on the left side of the face lateral to the lateral angle of left eye.
2) A deep incised wound about 1" on the superior aspect of the upper lip and inner aspect of the upper lip
3) Tenderness and swelling over left chest and left forehead
4) Pain at the left knee joint
5) Fracture of left patella
6) Comminuted fracture of Zygoma, anterolateral wall of maxillary antrum and lateral wall of orbit on left side
7) Mildly depressed fracture of left frontal bone.
The accident took place on 31.3.2006 at about 3.30 p.m. at Harkalgud near Bekanahally road, Hassan. The first information was recorded at about 6.00 p.m. on 8.4.2006 where claimant was being treated in S.C. Hospital. As per averments of claim petition and evidence of claimant, his brother H.P. Mahesh was riding the motor cycle at the time of accident. The claimant was the pillion rider. The accident took place when goods Lorry bearing Reg. No. KA-12-6687 came iron: behind and dashed against the motor cycle. As could be seen from the IMV Report, motor cycle bearing No. KA-13-Q-6356 of which, claimant was the pillion rider and his brother was the rider, was rat produced before IMV Inspector for inspection. The wound certificate reveals that claimant had suffered two incise injuries on the face lateral to the lateral angle of left eye and on the upper lip and inner aspect of the upper lip.
The tribunal without noticing these discrepancies in the evidence adduced by claimant has awarded global compensation of Rs. 40,000/-. The claimant embiggened by the success before the tribunal has approached this Court for enhancement of compensation. The evidence adduced by claimant suffers from several discrepancies however, such discrepant evidence has not been disputed by the Insurance Company before the tribunal. Therefore, I cannot reconsider the findings recorded by the tribunal.
In the circumstances, I do not find any justifiable grounds to enhance the compensation. Accordingly appeal is dismissed.