1/3 S.B.CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.687/97 (Naresh Kumar vs. Rakesh Kumar) DATE OF ORDER : 29/9/2009 HON'BLE DR.JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr.R.S.Mankad, for the appellant. Mr.Sanjeev Johari,] Mr.D.K.Bhutra, ] for the respondents. This appeal has been filed against the award of the MACT Tribunal dated 6/5/97 deciding claim case no.403/91. The claimant Naresh Kumar got injured in an accident while he was travelling in Jeep No.RJY 7545 from Udaipur to Mavli. The said jeep met with an accident on 18/5/1991 at 4.00 am with the truck coming from opposite side and the said claimant injured suffered fracture on the right side of the shoulder and face. The learned Tribunal while discussing his claim at page 11 and 12 of the impugned award has observed that the claimant has produced only the list of expenses incurred by him for medical treatment to the tune of Rs.1695.02 and that there was fracture in 2/3 maxilla bone and looking to the nature of injury the learned Tribunal determined the compensation of Rs.15,000/- which was directed to be paid with interest @ 15% p.a. Learned counsel for the appellant claimant submits that the right eye of the claimant was reduced in size on account of said fracture and, therefore, the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is less and deserves to be enhanced. On the other hand, Mr. Johari, learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submitted that no evidence was produced before the learned Tribunal in support of his claim and since no medical evidence is there on record, the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is sufficient and justified and does not call for any enhancement. Having heard learned counsels and upon perusal of the record of the case and reasons given by the learned Tribunal, this Court is satisfied that the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case is justified and adequate and does not call for any enhancement. 3/3 The claimant failed to adduce sufficient medical evidence showing permanent disability and disfigurement and, therefore, the compensation of Rs.15,000/- awarded by the learned Tribunal appears to be reasonable. Consequently, there is no force in the present appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed. (DR.VINEET KOTHARI), J. item no.12 baweja/-