SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(Raj) 649

MOHAMMAD RAFIQ
Jagdish Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Santu Singh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared
Akshat Choudhary for Jitendra Mitruka, for Claimant-Appellant;
Smt. Chitra Goyal, for Respondent-Insurance Co.

RAFIQ, J.—This appeal has been preferred by claimant dissatisfied with quantum of compensation awarded to him by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kotputali, vide its award dated 04.10.2004 in MAC Case No.443/2002.

2. Appellant sustained injuries in a road accident on 01.03.2002 involving a jeep bearing registration No.HR-35-8553, which was being driven by respondent no.1, owned by respondent no.2 and insured with respondent no.3. As a result of accident, appellant received 13 injuries, three of which were fractures in both legs and one fracture in hand. The medical board, that examined him for assessing his disability, found that there was shortening of his right lower limb by 2½ inch thereby causing disability of 16%. He suffered 3% limping and 3% difficulty in sitting cross-leg, climbing and walking. Thus, total disability sustained by appellant was assessed at 27.31%. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.76,500/- and cost of Rs.500/-, thus in total compensation of Rs.77,000/- has been awarded. Aggrieved thereby, appellant has approached this court seeking enhancement of compensation.

3. Shri Akshat Choudhary, learned counsel for appellant has argued that learned Trib









Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top