RAINA Vs. GURMEET SINGH & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal has been filed under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the appellant -claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No. 1 & Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bundi (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in claim case No. 536/2008 by which the Tribunal has awarded Rs. 70,124/ - with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of claim petition, for the injuries sustained by the appellant in the alleged accident. Challenging the quantum of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the learned counsel Mr. Sandeep Mathur for the appellant submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate more particularly under the head of non -pecuniary damages. He also submitted that considering the nature of permanent disability, the Tribunal should have awarded some compensation for the disfigurement. He also relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in case of Rajkumar Versus Ajay Kumar & Anr., reported in MACD, : 2011 SC 33, in support of his submissions.

(2.) HAVING regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, and to the impugned award passed by the Tribunal, it appears that the appellant was working as teacher in the Department of Education with the State Government and she met with an accident on 25.01.2007, when the claimant alongwith her husband was going on motorcycle and at that time one motorcycle bearing No. RJ -08 -SA -7985 driven by the respondent No. 1 hit the motorcycle of the claimant. As a result thereof, the appellant had sustained injuries, for which the Tribunal has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 70,124/ - with interest as stated hereinabove. The Tribunal considering the injury certificate (Exhibit -7) and the disability certificate (Exhibit -13), in the light of the oral evidence of the appellant has observed that the appellant was not only continued in the services after the accident but she got increment in her pay after the implementation of the 6th pay commission. It has been observed that there was nothing on record to suggest that because of the injuries sustained by the appellant, there was any impediment in the earning capacity of the appellant. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 5,000/ - for the injuries sustained by the appellant, Rs. 2,000/ - for the expenses incurred by her during hospitalization, Rs. 48,124/ - towards the medical expenses, Rs. 10,000/ - for the mental agony, pain and suffering and Rs. 5,000/ - for the nutritious food. The amount awarded by the Tribunal appears to be just and proper. In absence of any evidence on record, to show that the injuries had any way affected the earning capacity of the appellant, the said amount of compensation cannot be said to be inadequate. The Tribunal has awarded the compensation for the pecuniary as well as the non -pecuniary damages in the light of the decision of the Apex Court relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant. There being no illegality or infirmity in the impugned award passed by the Tribunal, the present appeal deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.