// 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1067/2006 With S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Appl. No.531/2006 Ram Kunwar Son of Shri Rodulal Versus Kamlesh Kumar Son of Shri Mohanlal and Others Date of Order ::: 05.12.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Chetan Jain, Counsel for appellant Shri Raj Pal Choudhary, Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for the parties. Admit. With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the appeal was heard finally and is being disposed of. The injured-appellant has preferred this appeal for enhancement of the amount of compensation in respect of injuries sustained by him in a motor-accident took place on 29th April, 2003 and being aggrieved with the impugned Award dated 12th July, 2005 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jhalawar in MAC No.142/2003, whereby the learned Tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.7,500/- in his favour, as under:- // 2 // 1. Rs.4,000/- For the injuries 2. Rs.2,500/- For medical bills 3. Rs.1,000/- For physical pain The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal committed an illegality in not awarding any amount of compensation for 2% permanent disability suffered by the appellant. He contended that a sum of Rs.25,000/- was paid to the injured under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and, after passing the impugned Award, the Tribunal passed an order that it will be open for the Insurance Company to recover the balance amount from the appellant. He contended that looking to the number and nature of injuries sustained and permanent disability suffered by the appellant, the amount of compensation may be enhanced up-to the amount of Rs.25,000/-, already received by him. He has not pressed his appeal for any other enhancement of the amount in excess to Rs.25,000/-. He, therefore, contended that the impugned Award may be modified to that extent. The learned counsel for the respondents defended the impugned Award and contended that no interference in it is called for. // 3 // I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and examined the impugned Award, particularly the finding of the learned Tribunal with regard to the quantum of compensation. As per the Injury Report (Exhibit-15), the appellant sustained two injuries and as per the permanent-disability- certificate (Exhibit-31) he suffered 2% permanent disability. However, the Tribunal was of the view that looking to the number and nature of injuries, the appellant is not entitled for any amount of compensation for the permanent disability suffered by him. After considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the Tribunal has not assigned any cogent reason for not accepting the permanent disability suffered by the appellant and the permanent- disability-certificate produced on the record, and committed an illegality in not awarding compensation for permanent disability suffered by the appellant. I further find that the amount of compensation awarded in the present case is a meager amount and it is liable to be enhanced up-to Rs.25,000/-, already paid to the appellant. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The amount of compensation of Rs.7,500/-, awarded // 4 // by the Tribunal, is enhanced to Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five thousand), already paid to the appellant. The impugned Award is accordingly modified. No order as to costs. In view of this order, the stay application, filed with the appeal, also stands disposed of. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//