( 1 )

( 2 ) THIS is a case in which the claimant-appellant is the injured person and the claim for compensation arose out of an accident which occurred on December 6 1971 at about 6-30 or 6-45 A. M. on the Naroda Road in Ahmedabad. The appellant who was aged about 15 at the material time was proceeding along the Naroda Road in the company of his sister Lila aged about 8 years with three donkeys to collect sand from the river-bed at Bhadreshwar. At that time A. M. T. S. bus No. G. T. A 8495 driven by the third respondent approached from the opposite direction that is to say from the Sardarnagar side. The bus hit one of the donkeys which fell down and then it collided against the appellant who was thrown down on the road and received injuries. The donkey died on the spot while the appellant was removed for treatment to the Civil Hospital. The appellant was hospitalised for a period of about four months and the medical evidence discloses that the accident has resulted in shortening of his right leg by half centimeter as also in a limp in the right leg. The permanent partial disability is assessed at 20%.

( 3 ) THE appellant thereupon instituted the claim application through his guardian before the Tribunal in which he claimed total compensation in the sum of Rs. 36 400 together with costs and interest. The claim was split up under various heads as follows: rs. 1000/- expenses incurred during the period of treatment rs. 1000/- future expenses for diet etc. Rs. 1000/- pecuniary loss from the date of the accident till the date of the Claim Application. Rs. 5000/- pain and suffering. Rs. 5000/- loss of amenities and enjoyment of life rs. 25000/- future pecuniary loss. Rs. 400/- loss of the donkey. Rs. 38,400 though the amount claimed under various heads as aforesaid totalled up to Rs. 38 400 the appellant restricted his claim to Rs. 36 400

( 4 ) THE Tribunal found that the appellant had sustained his injuries as a result of rash and negligent driving of the A. M. T. S. bus in question by the third respondent and that the first and second respondents were vicariously liable for the said act of the third respondent. As regards compensation the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 9150. 00 under the following heads: rs. 750/- expenses incurred during the period of treatment. Rs. 500/- pecuniary loss from the date of the accident till the date of the Claim Petition. Rs. 3000/- pain and suffering. Rs. 4500/- future pecuniary loss. Rs. 400/- loss of the donkey. Rs. 9150/ -. It is this award which is under challenge at the instance of both the parties. [ His Lordship after discussing the evidence further observed: ]

( 5 ) ON an analysis of the aforesaid evidence it clearly emerges that the appellant received multiple injuries in the course of the accident. His right leg was fractured. A nail had to be inserted into the right leg. Even after a period of about one year and eight months from the date of the accident when Dr. Bhatt examined the appellant the after-effects of the injury on the right leg were clearly discernible. The appellant was limping on account of the shortening of the leg by 1/2 c. m. There was wasting of the thigh and there was also fixed flexion deformity of hip. Even after such a long period the appellant was able to walk only with the support of a stick. FIe was not in a position to sit cross-legged and could squat only with support. The appellant has deposed that he was unable to walk with normal gait and could not bend his leg. There was fracture of the arm and it also left some defect. There was injury on the right eye-brow and consequential removal of a piece of bone from near the eye-brow. The appellant was unable to open his eye fully. It is true that with regard to the injuries on the arm and eye-brow there is no medical evidence. That is because the case papers and certificates have not been admitted into evidence. Dr. Bhatt has deposed only about the injury on the right leg presumably because being