G.M.LODHA, J. - (1.) THIS appeal under Section 110(D) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 has been filed by claimant Shri Devendra Raj, against the judgment and award dated 25th August, 1972 of the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal, Jodhpur in Civil Misc. Case No. 14A/1969. The Tribunal has given an award of Rs. 10,000/ - as general damages and compensation and in this appeal, the appellant has peaved that the compensation as prated in the original application should be awaded by increasing the amount from 10,000/ - to 1,00,000/ -.
(2.) SHRI Kin war Sen owner of the truck, Satyanarain driver and Venguard Insurance Co. respondents have neither filed any appeal against this judgment nor they have filed any cross -objection in this appeal. Hence, they are satisfied with the judgment of the Tribunal In view of this, it is not necessary to mention facts in details However, the facts in nut shell are as under: Appellant Shri Devendra Raj Mehta is an IAS officer in the State of Rajasthan On 7 -1 -69, the date on which the accident took place, he was Collector, Jaisalmer. He was going to village Sankara on official work in the Rajasthan Government Vehicle No. RJQ, 8228 along with some other officers. At about 8:30 p.m. near Pokaran octroi post, of Jaisalmer District, truck no. RJQ, 1168 came on with high speed and full lights on. It was being driven rashly and negligently by respondent no. 2 Satyanarain on the right had side i.e. on the incorrect side of the road. The said truck then violently collided with the vehicle of the appellant -claimant resulting in serious Injuries.
(3.) THE appellant had profuse bleeding, due to the injuries caused by this accident and became unconscious. He was then taken and treated In the Government hospital of Jodhpur, after the check up at Government hospital, Pokran, revealed tint the condition of the appellant became precarious, An operation was performed and then the appellant remained an indoor patient for 4 months first at Jodhpur and then in the Government hospital at Jaipur. The injuries suffered by the appellant as testified by Dr. Sethi were as under: (A) Abrasion 1 cm. x 3/4 cm. placed on posterior aspect of left hand on 3rd metacarpal bone. (B) Abrasion 1 1/2 cm. x 1/2 cm placed on laterial aspect of left hand on 1st metacarpal bone. (G) Abrasion 1/4 cm. in diameter on anterior aspect of left knee joint. (D) Lacerated wound 5 cm. long on posterior aspect of 2nd and 3rd metacarpal bone of the right hand. (E) Compound communicated fracture of lower 1/3rd of right femur. As per Dr. Bafaa, the operation was performed, along with Dr. Purohit and others Drs. ;