- (1.) THIS appeal by the Insurance Company is against the Award and judgment passed by the 4th Addl. Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, dated 10.2.1995, whereby a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/ - with interest, initially at the rate of 10% per annum and later on at the rate of 10%, has been awarded in favour of the respondent No. 1 and against the appellant.
(2.) THE case of the respondent No. 1 claimant before the Tribunal was that he had received injuries because of an accident, which occurred on 22.4.1990. In this appeal, we are not concerned with any question relating to the occurrence of the accident as such or whether the accident occurred because of the rashness and negligence on the part of the driver of the vehicle. That is not an issue for adjudication before us in this appeal. The limited issue raised for our adjudication by the appellant -Insurer is with respect to the determination of the quantum of compensation based on the assessment as per the learned Tribunal with regard to the alleged injury allegedly sustained by the respondent No. 1 and the alleged disablement suffered by him on account of, and as a result of the accident in question. What do we find from perusal of the judgment under appeal is that the claimant, apart from his own testimony, did not produce any evidence whatsoever to prove any fact either about any injury being suffered by him, or any disablement having been caused to him or any expenses incurred by him for the alleged treatment or for any injury. Admittedly, no doctor was produced. No other, evidence, medical or otherwise, was adduced by the claimant in the Tribunal in support of his claim for compensation. It is an established principle of law that if a claimant claims compensation for a wrong committed to him by a wrong doer, he has to establish his claim with regard to such facts and figures which justify the determina -tion of the compensation amount on the basis of the evidence adduced by the claimant in the Court, specially so, in a Claim petition filed under Sections 144 and 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act with regard to an alleged injury received by the claimant and the alleged disablement, partial or complete, suffered by him. He is under an obligation to prove the same by production of cogent evidence.
(3.) IN a case relating to the claim on account of an alleged injury allegedly sustained by a claimant, best evidence is of the medical witness. The Doctor who attended upon the claimant, treated him and prescribed medicines etc. for him, is the best person. He is the person who is in a position to testify as to whether the claimant received any injury, if so, its extent, and as to whether any disablement, permanent or temporary or partial, was suffered by the claimant. Coupled with this would be the evidence required to prove the expenditure which the claimant had to incur for treatment of the injury and for the sufferings etc. undergone by him. Such evidence can be in the form of witnesses who would come and testify about the expenses incurred by the claimant. These witnesses, medical as well as other witnesses, would always be subject to cross -examination by the opposite party.;