COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT :

1. The present appeals are filed at the instance of the original claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short “the Act), being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the common judgment and award dated 24.12.2014, passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.) at Junagadh in Motor Accident Claim Petitions No. 585 of 2000 and No. 639 of 2000. Since, the respective claim petitions were decided together and common evidence were led, these appeals were heard together and are decided by this common judgment.

First Appeal No. 1642 of 2015.

2. By the said judgment and award the Tribunal has though partly allowed the claim petition preferred by the original claimants under Section 166 of the Act, 1988, holding him entitled to recover amount of Rs. 2,96,000/- from the original opponents jointly and severally along with the proportionate costs and interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the filing of claim petition till its actual realisation, however, has not entertained their entire claim for compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs. Hence, the present appeal praying for enhancement of remaining amount of compensation. Considering the grounds raised in the appeal and the submissions made by learned advocate for the appellant, this Court vide order 02.09.2015 has admitted the appeal.

3. Learned advocate Mr. C.S. Shukla has entered appearance on behalf of respondent No.2-S.T Corporation. Despite service of notice of admission of appeal on respondents No. 1 and 3 namely the driver of the S.T. Corporation and the rickshaw driver, no appearance has been entered. The appeal is heard finally with the able assistance of learned advocate on record for the respective parties.

4. Learned advocate Ms. J.K Hingorani appearing for the appellant has vehemently assailed the impugned judgment and award on the issue of quantum of compensation. At the outset learned advocate has invited my attention to the comprehensive documents in the nature of medical case papers namely the disability certificates, and the injury certificates produced on record. The attention of this Court was invited to the medico legal certificate at Exh. 25 issued by the Community Health Center Keshod to indicate that the claimant had sustained multiple injuries in the nature of CLW on his face. The attention of this Court was invited to injuries sustained in the head by the claimant. Referring to the injury certificate produced on record at Exh. 26 issued by Dr. Prashant B. Chhaya M.S. (Ortho), learned advocate has submitted that it has been proved on record that the claimant has sustained grievous injuries in the nature of fracture dislocation of left wrist. It was submitted that the claimant was operated for the aforesaid injuries. The reliance was also placed on the certificate dated 10.07.2000 issued by Dr.Jayesh Odedra M.B.B.S., M.S, to point out that in fact after undertaking C.T scan, it was noticed that the claimant had suffered fracture of right frontal bone with hemorrhage contusion with pneumocephalis with blood in splendor and edimaid. Referring to the discharge card produced on record at Exh. 28, she had submitted that after undergoing various treatments including operation the claimant was discharged from hospital on 19.06.2000. The C.T Scan of brain was performed on14.06.2000, wherein it was noticed that the claimant has suffered linear fracture in right side of frontal bone followed by hemorrhagic contusion in right frontal region. Learned advocate has lastly referred to medical certificate dated 14.10.2011 issued by Dr. Navnit Shah M.D (Med.) F.I.C.A (USA) Diabetologist, Endocrinologist and Physician, and has submitted that in the later years, the claimant was diagnosed of suffering from pan hypopituitarism with infertility since 18.03.2006 as diagnosed by the doctor. She has therefore, submitted that due to motor vehicle accident, the claimant has suffered permanent disability and post accident life long suffer