Full Judgment
R.K. Varma. J.
1. This is an appeal filed by the claimant-injured against the award dated 8-7-1986 made by the First Addl. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. Indore in Claim Case No. 88. No whereby the learned Tribunal has awarded a total compensation of Rs. 10,650/- together with interest @ 12% per annum from 1-5-1980, the date of the claim petition till realisation.
2. The material facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly staled, are as follows :--
On 14-11-1979, at about 9.00 p.m. while the claimant who is aged 16 years, was going on a bicycle from Palasia-chouraha towards Regal Talkies on M. G. Road. Indore, a motorcycle bearing registration No. CPF 5941 belonging to the respondent No. 1 and being driven by respondent No. 2 rashly and negligently dashed against the claimant's bicycle with the result that the claimant was thrown away sustaining injuries on the head, body and limbs and fell unconscious. The claimant-injured was admitted in the M. Y. Hospital for treatment during the period between 14-11-1979 and2l-ll-1979 and again during the period between 17-12-79 and 21-12-1979. The claimant suffered a permanent disability to the extent of 2.5 per cent as a result of injuries, as has been estimated by Dr. Chari (AW-2).
3. On a claim petition having been filed by the appellant-claimant, the learned Tribunal, on appreciation of evidence adduced in the case, found that the accident resulting in the injuries to the claimant, occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the motor cycle in question by respondent No. 2. As regards compensation, the learned Tribunal found the claimant entitled to a sum of Rs. 9,500/- as compensation for pain and suffering and disability suffered. Rs. 1,000/- as expenses incurred for treatment and Rs. 150/- for repairs of the bicycle damaged on account of the accident.
4. Being aggrieved by the inadequacy of the award, the appellant-claimant has filed this appeal.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant-claimant has submitted that the amount of compensation deserves to be enhanced because the vision of the claimant has been affected and he has developed defect of double vision in the lower field only with both eyes open on account of the injuries sustained in the accident. Dr. Waghley who has issued the certificates Exs. A/14 and A/15 has not given a definite opinion as regards the cause of such defect. Ex. A/17 which is an Out-patient Ticket of Ophthalmic Department of M. Y. Hospital, dated 7-12-79 shows that the claimant was an old case of diplopia. In the circumstances, the learned Tribunal has not believed the allegation of the claimant that he came to acquire the defect of double as a result of the accident.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the evidence on record, we are of the opinion that the learned Tribunal has properly appreciated the evidence and the compensation awarded by him in respect of the injuries sustained by the claimant cannot be said to be unjust or unreasonable so as to call for any interference in this appeal.
7. In the result, this appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. There shall, however, be no order as to costs in the circumstances of the case.