SBCMA No.2684/2007 Smt.Ittari Vs.Aniss Mohd. & Ors with four similar connected mattes. 1 1 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.2684/2007 Smt. Ittari Vs. Aniss Mohd. & Ors. 2 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.124/2008 Manaka Vs. Aniss Mohd. & Ors. 3 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.125/2007 Smt. Kamla Vs. Aniss Mohd. & Ors. 4 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.229/2008 Smt. Maadhu Vs. Aniss Mohd. & Ors. 5 S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.117/2008 Rajendra Vs. Aniss Mohd. & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : - 23.1.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.Parikshit Nayak, for the appellant. Mr.TRS Sodha, for the respondents. <><><> Heard learned counsel for the parties. SBCMA No.2684/2007 Smt.Ittari Vs.Aniss Mohd. & Ors with four similar connected mattes. 2 Since by common award dated 27.2.2007, five claim petitions, namely MACT Case nos.37/2006, 38/2006, 39/2006, 39/2006, 40/2006 and 41/2006 were decided by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and against the said award dated 27.2.2007, the aforesaid five appeals have been preferred by the appellants, therefore, all these appeals are decided by this common judgment. The award passed in MACT Case No.37/2006 has been challenged on the ground that less compensation has been awarded. It is clear from the injury report Ex.9 that claimant suffered 3 simple injuries for which the tribunal awarded Rs.6,000/- and also awarded Rs.750/- against his treatment expenses. The appellant did not produce any certificate to show that he suffered any fracture or suffered any permanent disablement. Even any permanent disablement is not proved from Ex.10. In view of the above, I do not find that the compensation is low in any manner in claim case no.27/2006. SBCMA No.2684/2007 Smt.Ittari Vs.Aniss Mohd. & Ors with four similar connected mattes. 3 In claim case no.28/2006, the claimant claimed that she suffered several injuries and she was admitted in the hospital and she spent Rs.8,000/- to 10,000/- for her treatment. Contrary to it as per the injury report Ex.12, the claimant suffered only 2 simple injuries, even then the tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.4,500/- on account of these injuries. The claimant produced the certificate Ex.12, but that is contrary to the injuries suffered by the claimant and, therefore, the tribunal rightly rejected the contention of the appellant that she suffered any permanent disability. Therefore, the award of compensation of Rs.4,500/- cannot be said to be low in any manner. In claim case no.29/2006, the claimant proved her two simple injuries by the injury report Ex.15. In view of the above, the total award of compensation of Rs.4,500/- to the claimant for two simple injuries cannot be said to be low in any manner. In claim case no.40/2006, the claimant claimed huge SBCMA No.2684/2007 Smt.Ittari Vs.Aniss Mohd. & Ors with four similar connected mattes. 4 amount of Rs.9,85,000/- but from the injury report Ex.18 it is proved that she suffered 3 minor injuries. The tribunal has awarded Rs.6,000/- on account of her pain and sufferings because of the three injuries and further awarded Rs.750/- for her treatment. However, the claimant suffered one more injury in her hand, which resulted into 20% disability. For this, the tribunal has awarded Rs.7,000/- and in total awarded Rs.13,750/-. I do not find that the award is low in any manner. In claim case no.41/2006, the claimant claimed Rs.9,85,000/-, but she could prove her two injuries caused in the accident out of which, one was grievous resulting into permanent disablement of 27.5% of the hand. The tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.10,000/- on this count of permanent disablement of the claimant. The tribunal also awarded Rs.14,000/- for her suffering other injuries and Rs.5,000/- for special diet and in total she has been awarded Rs.29,000/-. The award cannot be said to be low in any manner. In view of the above, there is no merit in all the SBCMA No.2684/2007 Smt.Ittari Vs.Aniss Mohd. & Ors with four similar connected mattes. 5 appeals and the same are hereby dismissed. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. c.p.goyal/-