This appellate court dismissed the appellant's appeal against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The court held that the Tribunal correctly denied future prospects compensation because the appellant suffered only 1% permanent physical disability.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOlR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 375812019
Sushil Kumar Son Of Shri Babulal Kurmi Patidar, Aged About 48 Years, By Caste Kurmi Patidar, Resident Of Makan No. 487, Gali No. 7, Chambal Marg, Sanjay Nagar, Kota Junction, Kota (Raj).
Versus
For Appellant(s) : ' Mr. ~assemuddin Qazi For Respondent(s)
HON'BLE MR. J~JSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA
Judament
13/08/2019
This appeal "for enhancement of compensation is directed against the judgment and award dated 22.04.2019 passed by the Motor Acci:dent Cliaims Tribunal No.1, Kota (for short 'the Tribunal'), whereby the tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 1,47,450/as compensation along with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the Tribunal committed an error in awarding lesser compensation. The Tribunal has erred in not awarding any amount of compensation towards future prospects.
(2 of 2)
[CMA-3758/20119]
I have considered the submissions 'made by the learned counsel for the appellant andb have perused the material available on record.
The claim-petition was filed by the appellant seeking com.pensation on account of injuries sustained by him in the motor vehicle accident which occurred on 24.03.2017. As p:er the permanent disability certificate (Ex.53), the appellant had suffered n p- permanent physicalpliybijkV ta tf$e&xlpnt <ic-i ,$Q ,&fplOO/ 1 only. In view of p"". 4 4 &-$ + this, no amou~~{~fi6wards future prospects is l&:ble*t,o be awarded i r "1 i '- .A .<' ,. :' ./ to him. ,&'. =-"- I../' 4c flk lr ,+ 3 **2 7?-** '4 /,$Ai Therefore, no ground is made out to enhance the
amount of
dismissed.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal erred in not awarding compensation towards future prospects.
Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal required enhancement.
Sushil Kumar
Govind Prabhakaran
ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited
Prakash Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
