Judgment :

1. By this appeal, the appellant/claimant is seeking enhancement of compensation

2. It is contention of learned counsel for the appellant that due to accidental injuries, the appellant has suffered 75% disability and his leg is shortened by three inches. He was a fruit hawker. Due to shortening of Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHUBHADA SHANKAR SHANKAR KADAM his leg, the appellant is unable to do any work but this fact is not KADAM Date:

2024.12.18 +0530 considered by the Tribunal. Learned counsel further submitted that the Tribunal has considered monthly income of the deceased at Rs.100/- per day but it is considered only for 24 days, it should be for 30 days. Learned counsel further submitted that the Tribunal has scaled down the disability to 25%, which is erroneous. Learned counsel further submitted that the accident occurred due to sole negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle. An FIR was registered against him but the Tribunal has considered 10% contributory negligence of the appellant, which is erroneous. The Tribunal has not calculated compensation properly. Future medical expenses are not given. Proper amount is not given for loss of enjoyment in life and for pain and suffering. Learned counsel lastly submitted that the Tribunal has applied wrong multiplier. Hence, requested to allow the appeal.

3. Learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance Company submitted that no medical evidence is produced on record to prove the disability of the appellant. The Tribunal has considered evidence on record and, on that basis, compensation is awarded, which is proper and no interference is required in it and requested to dismiss the appeal.

4. I have heard both learned counsel, perused the impugned judgment and award passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sangli (for short “the Tribunal”).

5. To prove the disability, the claimant has examined himself. He has stated that the accident was caused due to negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle and due to accident, he has suffered four to five fracture injuries and he was unconscious. He further submitted that, initially, he took treatment ins Civil Hospital at Sangli, thereafter, he took treatment in the hospital of Dr. Ashok Patil for two to three months as indoor patient. Some surgeries were done on his thigh and leg. After the surgery, he visited the hospital of Dr. Patil as outdoor patient. Due to accidental injuries, he has suffered 75% permanent physical disability. Thereafter, there was problem in his thigh as cyst was developed in his thigh, hence, he took treatment of doctor – Shri G. S. Kulkarni and treatment was done on cyst. The appellant has spent Rs.35,000/- to Rs.40,000/- for the said treatment. Before the accident, appellant was selling fruits and he was getting Rs.200/- to Rs.250/- per day. Due to accidental injuries, his right leg has been shortened by three inches and his body below waist and right shoulder is completely disabled. The fingers of right leg have become useless. There is no cross-examination of this witness on the point of accidental injuries suffered by him.

5.1. The claimant has examined Dr. Ashok Patil at Exhibit-39. He has stated that the claimant was admitted in his hospital on 12^th April 2002. He had sustained certain fractures on neck, femur of right side, right foot, left foot, right thigh etc.. He was also having a dislocation of right sacroiliac joint with pubic symphysis disruption. He was indoor patient from 12^th April 2002 to 14^th June 2002 in his hospital. The claimant was again admitted in his hospital as indoor patient for some period. He sustained around 75% permanent disability and he has issued disability certificate, which is at Exhibit-40. The hospital bill was worth Rs.1,18,460/-. In cross-examination, this witness admitted that the medical bill(Exhibit-41) does not contain date, he admitted that he has issued separate injury certificate to the claimant.

5.2. While dealing with the issue of income of the a