HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED MA C.M.A.No. 1453 OF 2003 JUDGMENT: National Insurance Company is the appellant who filed the appeal challenging the award and decree passed in MVOP NO. 688 of 1999 dated 30.12.2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-cum-V Additional District Judge, Vijayawada, filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, claiming a compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/-. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The claimant is the driver of the lorry bearing No. AP 16 T 1242 belongs to M/s N. C.L Industries Limited, first respondent in OP which was duly insured with National Insurance Company Limited, second respondent therein. On 10.11.1995 at about 5 AM while the claimant driving the above lorry towards Hyderabad, another lorry bearing No. 2237 came in opposite direction driven in a rash and negligent manner and due to which he met with an accident near Vattimarthi Village and that he sustained fracture to his spinal card and both his hands. Hence the claimant filed the claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/-. To prove the claim of the claimant, the claimant himself was examined as PW-1 and marked Exs A1 to A9. On behalf of Insurance Company no oral or documentary evidence was adduced and no documents were marked. On consideration of the oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that since the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the accident lorry, the respondents 1 and 2 being owner and insurer respectively of the lorry, are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the claimant. The claimant was being the driver of the vehicle his income was taken as Rs. 2000 per month and for the age of 35 years taken the multiplier of 14.81 and granted Rs. 1,77,720/- estimating the disability at 50%. (2000x12x14.81=3,55,550 x50%). The Tribunal also granted Rs. 10,000/- towards medial expenses and Rs. 3,000/- towards extra-nourishment totaling Rs. 1,90,720/-. Aggrieved by the same, the Insurance Company filed the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant- Insurance Company submits that the Court below erred in fixing the income of the claimant at Rs. 2,000/- per month in the absence of any documentary evidence. He also submits that the court below erred in applying the multiplier 14.81 and it awarded Rs. 10,000/- towards medical expenses even though there are no medical bills produced to that effect. As seen from the record, it is no doubt true that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of driver of crime lorry. According to the claimant, he sustained fracture to both his hands besides fracture to his spinal card and he took treatment from Neurologist Dr. Pauparthi Ravi. Due to injury on his neck, he cannot move his head on either side and cannot close his fingers due to injury on his spinal card. But no doctor was examined to prove the same. In the circumstances, the impugned judgment passed by the Tribunal suffers from legal infirmity and also suffers from the law laid down by this Court in UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LIMITED VS. MOHD KHAJ RASOOL SAYYED[1], wherein it is observed that the doctor has to be examined and without examination of doctor, the question of assessing the compensation with regard to injury case does not arise. Following the above judgment, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment passed by the Tribunal in O.P.No. 688 of 1999 is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Tribunal for deciding the matter afresh after examining the doctor who has treated the claimant. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J Date: 15.07.2010 KA [1] 2003 (5) ALD 162