Proper assessment of permanent disability and its impact on earning capacity is crucial for determining just compensation in motor vehicle accident cases.

RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN, J.

1. Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. Also heard Mr. R.K. Bhatra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent New India Assurance Company Ltd.

2. The present appeal has been preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, challenging the judgment and order dated 15.3.2003, passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kamrup, in the MAC Case No.1010/1999.

3. The appellant as claimant has preferred the said claim petition claiming compensation on account of injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident. The brief case, that can be recapitulated is that on 19.9.1999, while the appellant was returning home on foot by the side of the NH-37, suddenly the vehicle No.HR-22-CA-0180 (truck), driving by the driver in rush and negligent manner, knocked him down from backside resulting grievous injuries to his person. He was treated in the hospital for the fracture injury sustained by him and after the release also, he continued his treatment. The Doctor who treated him certified that he sustained 45% disability from the injuries he sustained.

4. On the claim petition, so preferred by him, the learned Tribunal issued notice to the owner, driver and insurer of the vehicle. Only the Insurer of the vehicle contested the case by filing written statement and the other opposite parties did not contest the case.

5. In the written statement, the Insurance Company submits that the claimant is to strictly prove his case on which the allegation has been made and for any violation in the terms and conditions of the policy, the Insurance Company will not be liable to indemnify the insured. On the basis of the pleadings between the parties, following issued were framed:

1. Whether the claimant has sustained injuries while travelling in the vehicle?

2. Whether the driver drove the vehicle in a very rush and negligent manner?

3. Whether the claimant is entitled to get compensation?

4. Any other relief or reliefs which the claimant is entitled to get?

6. In the course of proceeding, the claimant examined himself and another eye witness of the occurrence and exhibited some documents and on the basis of the aforesaid evidence, the learned Tribunal held that the claimant sustained injury in the said accident due to rush and negligent driving of the vehicle. As regards the injury, the learned Tribunal on the basis of the medical documents as well as the disability certificate, that was issued by the GMCH, has awarded total amount of Rs. 79,000/-, which included pain and sufferings, permanent disablement, loss of amenities in life, medical expenses, etc. It transpires that the learned Tribunal has accepted the medical documents that has been produced by the appellant regarding the disability, without discussing in detail on the subject, as to whether the claimant sustained permanent or partial disability, as has been opined by the Medical Officer, who issued the certificate. The learned Tribunal was of the opinion that as the original medical certificate has been produced, so examination of the Doctor is not necessary.

7. The claimant/appellant however being dissatisfied with the aforesaid award, has brought the matter on the appeal on the contention that the learned Tribunal has not taken into account the extent of permanent disability suffered by him and other various facets of the case that the petitioner has to continue long treatment after the said accident, incurring huge expanses for his medical treatment.

8. I have heard the submission of learned counsel for the appellant as well as the learned counsel for the respondent on the ground of appeal. Where, according to the learned counsel for the appellant, the amount assessed by the learned Tribunal is not proper and the Tribunal has failed to award an adequate compensation on account of permanent disability, the le