XI-HC-78 HW,W,W Wmemkkwu.oa.ee <@ wW<W> WWW WWW mmqfsam Present:- Shri S.C. Verma, counsel for the ap "ant. Shri Dashtath Gupta, counsel for the respondent No.3. WWWEWW énw§twni21 P.T.O. H a1 zoog’ CLAIMENT Yadav, S/o 'Neeikanth Yadav, aged about 12 yrs Appellant is represented by legal guardian father Neelkanth Yadav, Rio Village and post Lakholl Post Omce Mandir Hasod Teh. and District Raipur Ve‘rsus RESPONDENTS: 1. Dinesh Kumar S/o ‘ Ramesh Chandra Agrawal R/o Dinesh Provision Store Charoda, Bhilai, District Durg\(C.G.) 2. Chunni Lal S/o Ramawatar Agrawal Rio National High Way Road No.6, Bajarpara Bhilai, Rs. Bhii‘ai, District Durg (C.G.) 3. United India Insurance Company Limited, Through: Divisional Manager, the United India Insurance Company Ltd., Katchari Chowk, Jail Road, Raipur (C.G.) XI—HC—78 HW,W,W @ WW(W) mmmm ”0% GMr (Passed or The appellant has preferred 1 \r :his appeai under Section 173 of the with the award passed by the 5'“ 1M.V. Act, 1988 being dissatisfied Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Raipur in claim case 'No.95/2003. the award passed by the Tribunal is The claimant's appeal is that bad, iNegaL inappropriate \and ag'air The Tribunal ought to have appreciated the loss incurred by the appellant. Learned Tribunal awarded Rs.12,000/- towards compensation against injury sustained by Chamanlal. Rs.935/— has been awarded towards been awarded towards pain and medical expenses. Rs.7,000/- has suffering. Rs.2,000/- has been awarded for the attendant and Rs.60l- has been awarded for the toss of earnin ;; thereby total award of Rs.21 995/- appellant/claimant. The appellant] has been passed in favour of the claimant at the time of the accident was aged about 11 years. He has not adduced any evidence that he was earning at that time. He remained only ‘ior two days in the hospital. No evid ence has been adduced to show that an account of injuries sustained by the claimant any permanent disability was been occurred to him. \\ \ mwawm éawm WWW 3211mm ORDER 20-3-2007) Ist the well settled principles of law. P.T.O. XI—HC—78 3a W, mm:, W3? €93 Wm ..................... W 200 Wm<W> WWW WWW v ' wwwm “3’ ' WWEWW '35W3néw ‘ is sufficient. Similarly, Rs.7,000I- for the pain and suffering, Rs.2,000l- for the attendant and remaining medical expenses have aiready been ‘awarded. therefore, i am of the considered opinion that compensation ‘ amount awarded in favour of the ap Iiant is just and reasonable. Vi in the last paraof the jud ment, on account of typographical mistake total amount of R521 ,995 as been typed out as Rs.24,995. in fact, respondent No.3 is required o pay only Rs.21,995l- and interest thereon as per the impugned award. t This appeal is devoid of merit, same is liable to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed. reiss’wrg/N" y v Sd/- i . u i "L.C. Bhados ’*‘ Barve Judge N?) P.T.O. ii l