AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R. Basant, J.—Claimant is the Appellant. He had suffered personal injuries in a motor accident which took place on 04.10.2007. He claimed an amount of Rs. 2 lakhs as compensation. He had suffered swelling and tenderness. There was minimally displaced fracture of the lateral condyle of tibia. He did not undergo treatment as an inpatient. He produced bills for the expenses incurred. He has not suffered any permanent disability. The Tribunal by the impugned award directed payment of an amount of Rs. 25,421/- in all as per the details given in para.10 of the award, which we extract below:
i)
Transport to hospital
:
Rs. 300.00
ii)
Extra nourishment
:
Rs. 300.00
iii)
Loss of earnings
:
Rs. 4,500.00
iv)
Treatment expenses
:
Rs. 5,321.00
v)
Pain and suffering
:
Rs.13,000.00
vi)
Loss of amenities
:
Rs. 2,000.00
Total
:
Rs.25,421.00
The challenge is directed only against the quantum of compensation awarded. Called upon to explain, the learned Counsel for the Appellant contends that loss of earnings computed at Rs. 3,000/- per mensem for a period of 1 = months is inadequate. Amount awarded under the head of loss of amenities is also not adequate. The counsel generally challenges the quantum of compensation awarded under all the relevant heads.
We have briefly adverted to the nature of injuries, nature of treatment and the consequence that followed. We are of the opinion that in any view of the matter, the Tribunal cannot be found fault with for assuming that the monthly income of the Appellant could have been Rs. 3,000/-; that he may have been involuntarily unemployed for a period of 1 = months and that the fracture which was suffered by him entitles him to a compensation of Rs. 15,000/- under the composite head of pain and suffering and loss of amenities. No. disability having been proved, we are not persuaded to agree that the amount awarded under the head of loss of amenities does warrant interference.
We are satisfied that there is No. merit in the contention that the amount of Rs. 25,421/- awarded by the Tribunal does not represent fair, reasonable and adequate compensation.
This appeal is, in these circumstances, dismissed in limine.