S. Sujatha, J.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Muddebihal in MVC No. 115/2010.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant assailing the impugned judgment and award would contend that the Tribunal has considered the permanent disability to the extent of 10% as against the evidence led by PW3 - the doctor who had categorically stated that the injured had the disability of the right eye to the extent of 40% - 45%. It is also contended that the compensation awarded under the other heads is also on a lower side. Accordingly, he seeks for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing in or the insurer supporting the order passed by the Tribunal would contend that the Tribunal having appreciated the material evidence available on record has awarded just and proper compensation which cannot be found fault with.

5. Having heard the counsel appearing for the parties and perusing the material on record, it is noticed that the Tribunal has determined the permanent disability of right eye of the injured to the e