JUDGMENT : 

YASHVIR SINGH RATHOR. J.(Oral)

1. The record of the present case was destroyed in a fire incident in the High Court Branch. Learned counsel for the appellants/claimants has placed on record copies of the grounds of appeal, memo of parties, and the Award, which are taken on record. The Registry is directed to tag the same at an appropriate place in the record.

2. This appeal has been instituted against the Award dated 11.12.2001 passed by MACT, Gurgaon (for short “Tribunal”) for enhancement of compensation awarded in MACT Case No.116 of 27.07.2000 in a petition under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 vide which a sum of Rs.51,600/- has been awarded as compensation to the claimant/appellant alongwith interest at the rate of 9% per annum on account of injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicular accident which took place on 17.08.1999 on account of rash and negligent driving by respondent No.3-Khalil, while driving offending vehicle bearing No.HR-50- 1314 (for short ‘offending vehicle’), owned by respondent No.1, which was insured with respondent No.4.

3. From the pleadings of parties, following issues were framed:-

1. Whether deceased Azim Khan died and claimant Mohammad Hanif and sustained injuries in an accident caused by vehicle No.HR-50-1314 due to rash and negligent driving on the part of respondent No.2 as alleged? OPP.

2. To what amount of compensation, if any, and from whom the claimants are entitled? OPP.

3. Whether the vehicle was being driven by a person not holding a valid and effective driving licence? OPR3.

4. Whether the vehicle was being driven in violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy. If so its effect? OPR3.

5. Relief.”

4. Thereafter, the parties led evidence in support of their case.

5. After hearing the parties and going through the material on the file, learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.51,600/- as compensation to the claimant, on account of injuries suffered by him along with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till realization, payable by respondents No.1, 3 and 4, jointly and severally. However, Insurance Company was absolved of its liability to indemnify the insured on account of violation of terms and conditions of the insurance policy and it was given a right to recover the awarded amount from the insured/owner.

6. Feeling aggrieved, the appeal in hand has been preferred. The material on file has been perused and parties have been heard.

7. The only issue required to be determined in the present appeal relates to the assessment of compensation. Therefore, the entire facts regarding the manner of the accident are not required to be reproduced in detail, as the Tribunal has already held under issue No.1 that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving on the part of respondent No.3-Khalil while driving offending vehicle and respondents No.1, 3 and 4 have been held liable to pay compensation jointly and severally. No appeal or cross-objections have been filed by respondents, challenging the said finding and accordingly finding on issue No.1 is not required to be interfered with and the same is affirmed.

8. It is pertinent to mention that the record of the present appeal and the Tribunal has got burnt in a fire incident in the High Court Branch and the present appeal has to be decided on the basis of the facts and evidence discussed by the Tribunal in the impugned award.

9. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the Tribunal has not appreciated the facts of the case and evidence on file in the correct perspective while assessing the compensation which is grossly inadequate. The claimant had suffered 7.5% permanent disability and he has been awarded a total compensation of Rs.51,600/- for medicines, special diet, transportation, pain and sufferings, loss of earnings, loss of employment and enjoyment. Learned counsel further argued that on account of permanent disability suffered by him, the claimant will suffer ‘loss of income’ a