AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
. Heard Mr. S. V. Ingole, learned Counsel h/f Mr. Shreshyas Khadse, learned Counsel for the Appellant, Ms. Anvita Pande, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1 and Mr. R. N. Ghuge, learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2.
By the present Appeal, the Appellant has assailed the Judgment and order dated 14/11/2008 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Akola in MACP No. 167/2007 and sought enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
In the light of submissions made by the learned Counsel for both sides, I have gone through the impugned Judgment, particularly, paragraph Nos. 8, 9 and 10, which clearly establish the fact that by considering the disability certificate, the learned Tribunal has assessed the disability as 3% and on that basis assessed the compensation to the Appellant. It is further seen from the record that the learned Tribunal has considered the evidence of Dr. Sudhir Rambhau Men and Dr. Shailendra Purushottam Deshmukh, while considering the loss of income caused to the Appellant due to that injury. The findings of the Tribunal seems to be justified and in consonance with the law laid down by this Hon’ble Court as well as the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.
According to me, the perusal of the impugned order no where shows prima facie illegality while determining the compensation amount. So also the Appellant did not place any additional evidence on record than considered by the Claim Tribunal in the Petition. Therefore, considering the reasons stated in the impugned order, I am satisfied that the learned Tribunal has awarded just and fair compensation in the matter. Hence, for the reasons stated in the impugned order, no interference is warranted, and accordingly, the present Appeal stands dismissed.