- (1.) THIS appeal had been filed by claimant injured Udai Lal in this Court under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for enhancement of the award amount. Impugned award was passed on
(2.) 3.2000 by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Udaipur in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 167/1993 titled as Udai Lal Vs. Chairman Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur in his favour. Appeal has been opposed by the respondent. 2. I have heard both the parties. Injured Udai Lal was driving a jeep no. RJ - 09 -T -678 on 14.10.1992 and because of negligence of driver of bus no. RJ -14 -9349 owned by RSRTC, Jaipur, jeep collided with the bus and the jeep driver also got some injuries along with other persons sitting in the jeep. Four different claims were filed by four different injured persons against RSRTC, Jaipur in this matter but appeal of Udai Lal only is pending before this Court. It has been told that other three claimants have either not filed the appeals or their appeals have already been decided by other co -ordinate Benches of this Court. I have heard both the parties. Injury report of Udai Lal has been exhibited as Ex -3 before the MACT, his discharge ticket exhibit -5 is also there in the file of MACT. From perusal of the discharge ticket, it appears that Udai Lal was admitted in RNT Medical College & Hospital, Udaipur on 14.10.1992 for treatment and he was discharged on 30.10.1992 after treatment. Udai Lal (AW -1) had stated in his statement before MACT that he had been an indoor patient in that hospital for four months. Thus, it appears that Udai Lal had not put the correct facts before the MACT. He states in his examination -in -chief that he had to spend Rs. 40,000/ - on treatment and medicines and he had to spend Rs. 4,000/ - or 5,000/ - on his transportation charges but cash memos worth Rs. 2093/ - (two thousand and ninety -three rupees) only have been submitted by him which too relates to price of medicines only. He has submitted no vouchers of transportation etc. Udai Lal has not examined any doctor in support of his injury report. A disability certificate signed by two doctors has been exhibited by him as exhibit -39 in which 10% permanent disability due to liver injury has been mentioned. Certificate exhibit -39 does not mention that this percentage of disability relates to the whole body or it relates only with one part of body. In certificate exhibit -39 it has also been mentioned that driver Udai Lal is unfit to drive a four wheeler vehicle at present. Certificate does not mention that in future also he will not be able to drive any vehicle.
(3.) ACCORDINGLY , in the above background the MACT, Udaipur has awarded a compensation of Rs. 63,000/ - (sixty -three thousand) along with 6% simple annual interest from the date of claim. Out of this amount, the tribunal has awarded Rs. 3,000/ - for simple injuries, Rs. 15,000/ - for grievous injuries, Rs. 25,000/ - for disability mentioned in the exhibit -39, Rs.;