S.B.C.M.A. NO. 387/2010 1 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 387/2010 Dr. Farasram Rathi and Anr. Vs. Khetaram Dated : 10/05/2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA Mr Surendra Singh for the appellants. 1. This misc. appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is directed against the award dated 10.11.2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Barmer in Motor Accident Claim Case No.18/09 whereby compensation of Rs. 21,410/- along with interest @ 9% from the date of filing of the application, has been awarded in favour of the respondent/ claimant. 2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the learned tribunal has committed gross error of law and facts in deciding issue No.1 in favour of the respondent/claimant and against the appellants. Learned counsel submitted that the tribunal has seriously erred in deciding issue No.1 solely on the basis of result of investigation made by the police. It is further submitted that no reliable evidence was produced on record to establish that the accident had occurred on account of negligence on the part of Dilip Kumar, the appellant No.2 herein. 3. It is to be noticed that no evidence whatsoever was produced on behalf of the appellants before the tribunal. The respondent/claimant Khetaram in his statement has stated that the accident occurred on account of rash and negligent driving on the part of the motorcyclist, the appellant No.2 herein. It is also not in dispute that after due investigation, the police has S.B.C.M.A. NO. 387/2010 2 filed charge sheet against Dilip Kumar, the appellant No.2 for the offences under Sections 279, 337 and 338 IPC and under Section 134/187 of the MV Act. In this view of the matter, looking to the un-rebutted evidence on record, the findings arrived at by the Court below on issue No.1 regarding the negligence on the part of the appellant No.2 herein cannot be said to be contrary to the record or perverse so as to warrant interference by this Court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel that the compensation to the tune of Rs.21,410/- awarded in favour of the respondent/claimant is on higher side. It has come on record that the respondent/claimant has suffered grievous injury and on that account only a sum of Rs.5000/- has been awarded to him as compensation and remaining amount of Rs. 16,410/- has been awarded against the medical bills produced and therefore, by no stretch of imagination, the compensation awarded by the tribunal can be said to be on higher side. 5. No other point has been pressed on behalf of the appellants. 6. For the aforementioned reasons, the appeal lacks merit and it is hereby dismissed. (SANGEET LODHA),J. rp