JUDGMENT : P.S. Patankar, J. 1. Heard the learned advocate for appellants at length. 2. This appeal arises out of application which was filed by the respondent u/s 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for loss that was caused to him because of the accident. 3. The appellant No. 1 is the owner of vehicle involved and the appellant No. 2 is the insurance company with which the said vehicle was insured. The vehicle involved was Fiat car bearing No. MMY 7116. The accident took place on 9.2.1987 at about 10.00 a.m. near Western Express High- way, Vile Parle, Bombay. The respondent suffered serious injuries in the accident for which he was hospitalised for a long time and could not attend his office for very long time. The various contentions which were raised on behalf of the appellants came to be negatived by the court below and ordered that respondent was entitled to get compensation of Rs. 33,085/- with 12 per cent interest per annum. The said order is under challenge in this appeal. 4. The main question that is canvassed by the learned advocate for appellants is that the said vehicle was not at all involved in the said accident and the identity of the said car was not at all established by the respondent. It may be noted at the outset that after knocking down the respondent, the driver of the car fled away leaving the respondent unconscious. However, it is clear that number of the said car was noted. There were two persons near the site of the accident-one by name Anant and other Mahadeo Sawant. Mahadeo Sawant took the respondent to Cooper Hospital in a taxi and Anant filed F.I.R. (Exh. 20). The said Anant got the said number from Mahadeo Sawant and which came to be mentioned in F.I.R. The said F.I.R. is produced on record at Exh. 20. It mentions the said number MMY 7116. Further it also mentions that the car involved was a Fiat car. Further Anant has stated that it was white coloured while it came to be pointed out on behalf of the appellant No. 1 that it was having mustard colour. This would not make much difference. In any case colour of a car can be changed at any time. The make is important. Further Anant has stated that it was white coloured while it came to be pointed out on behalf of the appellant No. 1 that it was having mustard colour. This would not make much difference. In any case colour of a car can be changed at any time. The make is important. This cannot, therefore, be a reason to disbelieve the evidence of Anant. Crime Report was also produced on record which showed that Director of appellant No. 1 by name Sunil Puri was arrested and released on bail. Puri denied that he was arrested and released on bail. But obviously he was not telling truth. Therefore, the finding recorded by the court below that identity of car was sufficiently established was correct. I, therefore, reject this contention. 5. The second point raised on behalf of the appellants was that the court below has erred in granting compensation of Rs. 15,785/- for the loss of salary. The evidence showed that the respondent suffered very serious injuries. There was fracture of femur, his right leg was shortened. He was 65 years of age and was required to be hospitalised for 4 months. He has also deposed that he could not attend the work for 11 months. He was employed in a private firm on the salary of Rs. 1,435/- per month. Considering the injuries and the time he was required to be hospitalised and his age, there was no reason to disbelieve that he could not attend the work for 11 months and suffered loss of salary. In fact he has produced his salary certificate at Exh. 8 showing the salary received by him. The respondent has also examined Dr. Bhatia at Exh. 21 to prove the various injuries suffered by him. Considering this, the court below was right in awarding the said amount. No other point was canvassed. This appeal is devoid of any merit. The same is dismissed summarily.