1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.1200/08 Prahlad vs. Kedar Choudhary & Ors. Date of order : 17/4/2008. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Dinesh Kumar for the appellant. ****** Heard learned counsel for the appellant. This appeal has been preferred at the instance of claimant-injured against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal with the prayer that the quantum of compensation should be suitably enhanced. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the appellant had asserted earning of Rs.5,000/- per month for which the Tribunal has recorded no finding and has merely awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards permanent disability which was assessed to be 15%. It was argued that even if the minimum wages payable at the relevant time would be taken into consideration, this amount is not 2 justified. It was argued that the appellant had sustained fracture of nozzle bone, right shoulder and jaw, which resulted into dis-figuration of his face. The Tribunal had not awarded any compensation on the ground of loss of income inasmuch as overlooked the fact that appellant had remained hospitalised for 8 days and remained bedridden for three months thereafter. Awarded amount on the head of nutritious food and transportation is also on lower side. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the impugned order, I find that though the appellant had asserted before the Tribunal that he was earning a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month by agriculture work but he did not produce any evidence to substantiate his claim, even then the Tribunal taking into consideration 15% disability, awarded a sum of Rs.30,000/- on that account. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/- for mental and physical agony and 3 Rs.10,000 for nutritious food. The Tribunal has also awarded a sum of Rs.20,578/- towards the medical expenses. In totality, therefore, I do not find that the Tribunal has erred in law in awarding that much of compensation to the appellant. No case is made out for interference. The appeal stands dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/