JUDGMENT :

1) Since an identical issue is involved in both the cases, they are being heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order.

2) Both the appeals have been filed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned 2nd Additional District Judge, Mahasamund (C.G.) passed in Civil Suit No. H-08B/2014 whereby the 2nd Additional District Judge, Mahasamund has awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/- for the alleged negligence committed by the defendant No. 1. First Appeal No. 53/2015 has been filed by defendant No. 1 for quashment of the impugned judgment and decree whereas First Appeal No. 89/2015 has been filed by plaintiff for enhancement of the compensation.

3) For convenience plaintiff and defendants are termed as it exists before the trial Court.

4) The plaintiff has filed civil suit before the learned trial Court contending that defendant No. 1 was working as Health Worker in the Government Hospital. On 21.07.2003, plaintiff's son was suffering from acute diarrhea, she took her to the Government Hospital where defendant No. 1 was posted. The plaintiff keeping her son on her lap was sitting for injection. But while administering injection defendant No.1 negligently inserted injection in the eye of the plaintiff, which has caused serious injury. Defendant No. 1 had given some primary treatment and since condition did not improve, the Doctor has advised the patient to go to Medical College, Raipur on 26.07.2003. Though the medical treatment was given at Government Hospital, Mekahara, Raipur after some treatment, the son of defendant No. 1 said that the doctor has suggested that treatment is possible at Government Hospital, Mahasamund. On the next day, when the plaintiff reached to defendant No. 1 for going to Government Hospital, Mahasamund, she did not take her to Mahasamund but dressed herself her eye and provided treatment for about 10-12 days, but there was no improvement. Due to negligence of defendant No. 1 plaintiff lost her vision in that eye. Due to the eye problem she could not be able to see which has prevented her to go for work as labour. The husband of plaintiff lodged FIR before the Police Station, Tumgaon on 12.10.2003. On the above factual matrix the Plaintiff preferred suit for compensation to the tune of Rs. 3,00,000/- which was registered as Civil Suit No. H-08B/2014. Since, the plaintiff is below poverty line as such she was exempted from payment of Court fee.

5) The defendant No. 1 filed written statement denying the allegations made in the plaint mainly contending that due to falling of water she all of a sudden fell down which has caused abrasion in the eye and there was no serious injury in the eye. It has also been stated that defendant No. 1 has sent the plaintiff for treatment on her own expenses. The plaintiff was satisfied with the treatment given by the hospital. She was discharging her duties. There is no negligence on her part. It is further contended that she is working in the Health Department, Government of Chhattisgarh therefore for any act and omission the State is responsible and they have to pay the compensation. It is further contended that claim has been made for exaggerated amount. It is empathically denied that her loss of earning is adversely affected, in fact, her annual income is Rs. 1.50 Lakh, therefore, she is not entitled to get exemption from payment of court fee. Since the suit has been filed without affixing proper court fee the same is not maintainable and the same is liable to be dismissed.

6) The learned trial Court on the pleadings of the parties framed as many as 5 issues. Issue No. 1. A and B are vital for deciding the appeal, therefore, they are extracted below:-

1.A Whether negligence of defendant No. 1 injection was inserted in the left eye of the plaintiff on 21.07.2003?

1.B If yes, then whether the plaintiff is able to see by her left eye?

7) The plaintiff to substantiate her averment has examined herself as PW/1, Dr. Maneesha Srivastav