THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR C.M.A.No.529 of 2001 JUDGMENT: This appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement over the award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-cum-District Judge, Vizianagaram, in O.P.No.736 of 1998, dated 30.11.2002. It is the case of the claimant-appellant that while he was driving Van bearing No.ADN 9279, the said vehicle met with an accident on 27-03- 1998. According to the claimant, he was driving the said van and when he reached near Govindapuram Mill, at the curve of the road, he applied sudden breaks. The breaks failed and the vehicle turned turtle, as a result of which, the claimant sustained injuries. Therefore, the appellant filed the said O.P. claiming compensation of Rs.2,20,000/- against the owner and the insurer of the said vehicle on the ground that he suffered serious injuries and one of them was grievous resulting in 20% disability to him. He claimed that he had taken medical treatment in Government Hospital and then at a private hospital and basing on that, he claimed the said compensation. Before the Tribunal below, the claimant examined himself as PW.1 and marked Exs.A-1 to A-6, which includes Ex.A-3-Wound Certificate and Ex.A-6-Disability Certificate. Ex.X-1 is the Case Sheet issued by the District Hospital, Vizianagaram relating to PW.1. Ex.B-1 is the copy of insurance policy of the vehicle. The Tribunal, on issue No.1, found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the van by the appellant-driver himself. On issue No.2, the Tribunal, on the basis of the evidence on record, found that no documents are filed by the claimant to prove the medical expenditure incurred by him. The medical treatment at Government Hospital may not have cost any amount, but at the private hospital, where he claims to have taken treatment is not supported by any bills or prescriptions. The Tribunal, therefore, assessed the compensation at Rs.24,000/-, which includes compensation for a simple injury Rs.1,500/-, grievous injury Rs.12,500/- and disability Rs.10,000/-. Dissatisfied with the said award, the present appeal is filed by the claimant. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the insurance company. I have seen the documents marked, particularly the wound certificate- Ex.A-3 and disability certificate-Ex.A-6. It is no doubt true that the injury described as grievous and the disability certificate shows 20% disability. However, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents has relied on a decision of this court in UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Vs. MOHD.KHAJ RASOOL SAYYED AND MOHD.KHAJAMAIN SHAIK[1] and contends that neither the medical evidence is produced nor is anybody examined in support of the same. The said documents, therefore, cannot be taken into consideration in the absence of proof of those documents. While it is true that there is no evidence produced in support of the wound certificate or the disability certificate, but, however, the disability certificate was issued by the Authority under G.O.Ms.No.109, Women’s Development Child Welfare and Labour Department, dated 15-06-1997. However, I found that neither the claimant has adduced any evidence in support of the documents nor the insurance company, which is now disputing its liability has adduced any evidence. The learned counsel for the claimant-appellant submits that the appellant was not advised properly and could not adduce further evidence, though he has medical bills and prescriptions, through which he could have established the medical expenditure incurred by him. He also submits that he could as well adduce further evidence in proof of the medical treatment taken by him and therefore he requests that an opportunity may be granted to the appellant for adducing further evidence. Keeping in view the fact that the provision with respect to compensation for those injured by use of motor vehicle being a beneficial provision and the endeavour of the Claims Tribunal being to award just compensation for victims of such accidents, I deem it appropriate to accept the request of the learned counsel for the appellant and remit the M.V.O.P.No.736 of 1998 to the Tribunal below, by setting aside the impugned order, with a direction that the claimant-appellant as well as the respondents be afforded an opportunity to adduce further evidence, if any, in support of their respective claims and on consideration threof, and the existing material on record, the Tribunal shall decide the matter afresh. The amount, determined by the Tribunal under the impugned order and withdrawn, if any, by the claimant-appellant pending this appeal, shall abide by the result of the fresh decision to be taken by the Tribunal below. The appeal is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Dated: 08-02-2010 Prv [1] (2003 (5) ALD 162