// 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.4887/2008 Balu Ram Son of Hardev Versus Chandgi Ram and Others Date of Order ::: 10.12.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri B.L. Dhakar, Advocate, for Shri Jai Prakash Gupta, Counsel for appellant #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for the appellant. The injured-appellant has preferred this appeal for enhancement of the amount of compensation in respect of injuries sustained by him in motor-accident took place on 28th September, 1996 and being aggrieved with the impugned Award dated 1st April, 2005 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge, Fast Track), Beawar, in Claim Case No.48/2004 (Old No.317/1998), whereby the learned Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.10,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of claim application i.e. 06.08.1998 up-to the date of payment, in his favour. The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the appellant remained // 2 // admitted in the hospital during the period from 28th August, 1996 to 3rd September, 1996 and again from 11th September, 1997 to 17th September, 1997, therefore, the amount of compensation awarded in the present case is a meager sum and the same is liable to be enhanced. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant in the light of finding recorded by the Tribunal with regard to quantum of compensation. Learned counsel for the appellant does not dispute that the appellant did not suffer any permanent disability on account of injury sustained by him in the motor accident; no permanent disability certificate has been placed on the record. The learned counsel for the appellant further does not dispute that so far as the documents relating to admission of the appellant in the hospital, as mentioned above, are concerned, they were only Photostat copies. The appellant neither produced original nor certified copies on the record to prove that he remained hospitalized during the above period, nor he got the said documents exhibited in the case. The Tribunal observed that the appellant sustained only one grievous injury and accordingly awarded Rs.5,000/- towards it. The Tribunal, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, further awarded Rs.5,000/- for // 3 // physical pain, nutritious-food, transportation charges, loss of income etc., and thus awarded total compensation of Rs.10,000/- with interest, as mentioned above. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the learned Tribunal was fully justified in not awarding any specific amount of compensation for the aforesaid period, as argued by the learned counsel for the appellant, in absence of the original or certified copies of the documents with regard to the fact that the appellant remained hospitalized during that period. The said documents were also not got exhibited. Therefore, the Tribunal has committed no illegality in not awarding any amount of compensation for the period he remained hospitalized. The amount of compensation awarded in the present case appears to be just, fair and reasonable, and no interference in it is called for. In view of the above discussions, I do not find any merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed in limine. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//