SBCMA NO.1113/2000. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Chandrakant and ors. S.B. CIVIL MISC.APPEAL NO.1113/2000. Date of order : 16/04/2008. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri R.S. Shekhawat Dy.Government Counsel for the State. ****** BY THE COURT:- Heard learned Deputy Government Counsel for the State. This appeal has been filed at the instance of the State of Rajasthan against the award of the MACT Dholpur dated 16/3/2000. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the Tribunal was not justified in awarding Rs.30,000/- towards compensation and amount of interest has also been awarded on higher side. It was argued that the Tribunal overlooked the fact that the accident occurred due to negligence of the respondent No.2 and therefore the findings recorded in Issue No.1 were not justified. In support of his aforesaid argument, learned counsel for the appellants argued that log book of the government vehicle was produced before the Tribunal according to which, the vehicle in question was standing at the residence of District Education Officer since evening SBCMA NO.1113/2000. 2 of 1/5/1990 till 10.00 a.m. of 2.5.1990. It was argued that this fact has not at all been considered by the Tribunal. Learned counsel submitted that Issue Nos.2 and 3 have also not been correctly decided by the Tribunal and no liability whatsoever has been fastened on the insurance company. Having heard learned counsel for the appellants and considering the documents on record, I find that the Tribunal on the basis of the evidence came to hold that injured in the present case sustained fracture of leg and that a steel plate has been inserted to support his leg. The Tribunal observed that the injured had to remain hospitalized for more than two months and no evidence contrary to it was produced by the appellants before the Tribunal in rebuttal of such evidence. The Tribunal taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, awarded Rs.30,000/- and directed that on such amount, the claimant respondent shall be entitled to receive interest @ 12% per annum. This interest was awarded in the year 2000 when prevailing market rate was different. I do not find any merit in this appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil/-