Judgment :- 1. This appeal by the appellant-insurance company is directed against the judgment and award dated 21.2.2006 passed in MVC No.931/03 by the MACT., Tumkur challenging the compensation awarded to R-1/claimant. 2. Facts in brief are: R-1 lodged a claim petition before the MACT., Tumkur stating that on 4.6.2003 at about 3-30 p.m. while he was carrying a submersible pump and proceeding towards bus-stand of Kestur village, a motor cycle bearing No. KA-06-S-885 ridden by its rider came in a rash and negligent manner from his behind and dashed against him. On account of the impact, his left hand was completely crushed and he was admitted to District hospital, Tumkur and thereafter he was shifted to Abhaya Hospital, Bangalore where he stayed there for 16 days during which period his left had came to be amputated due to which he is unable to carry on his avocation which has resulted in loss of income. Therefore he lodged the claim petition. 3. Insurance company contested the case denying the accident and involvement of the vehicle bearing No.KA-06-s-885 and contended that the accident did not occur and he did not suffer any injury in road traffic accident, as such they are not liable to pay any compensation accordingly sought for dismissal of the petition. Trial court on considering the evidence, documents and relying on Ex.P-1 First Information lodged by the complainant allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.3,72,134/- with interest at 8% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of payment and fastened the liability of payment of compensation on the insurance company. The appellant-insurance company being aggrieved by the judgment and order of the tribunal fastening liability on them are in appeal before this court. 4. Yesterday we heard the matter in detail. According to learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company, claimant did not suffer any injury in road traffic accident. The police after investigation have come to the conclusion that one Umesh is running a work shop at Kestur village. The claimant had been to the work-shop of Umesh and when he was in the work-shop his left hand was caught in between the lathe machine resulting in auto-amputation and in order to claim compensation, claimant in collusion with the owner of the motor cycle has filed a false complaint. The claimant had been to the work-shop of Umesh and when he was in the work-shop his left hand was caught in between the lathe machine resulting in auto-amputation and in order to claim compensation, claimant in collusion with the owner of the motor cycle has filed a false complaint. In view of this, they are not liable to pay any compensation and therefore, he requested the court to allow the appeal and dismiss the claim petition. For contra, learned counsel for the claimant supporting the judgment and award of the tribunal requested the court to dismiss the appeal. 5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the records produced before us, it is noticed by us that the claimant has alleged that he sustained crush injury to his left upper arm on 4.6.2003 at about 3-30 p.m. on account of the motor cycle dashing against him. Kestur village is very near to Tumkur City. It is situated at a distance of about 10 to 15 Kms. from Tumkur City. In the petition claimant has stated that immediately after the accident he was taken to Tumkur General Hospital. But records speak that he was shifted to Abhaya Hospital, Bangalore which is known for treating psychiatric and neurological patients. Ex.P-3 is the disability certificate issued by Abhaya Hospital, Bangalore which shows that the claimant was admitted to hospital on 4.6.2003 and was discharged on 6.6.2003. During his stay in the hospital under general anesthesia his left upper limb was amputated above the elbow. Doctor has assessed the disability of 80% to his left upper limb. Ex.P-2 is the wound certificate issued by the District Hospital, Tumkur which says that in an accident claimant’s left upper limb was amputated and he visited the hospital on 16.6.2003 and the doctor says that age of the wound maybe of one week, which clearly shows that the allegations made in the petition that immediately after the accident he had been to Tumkur District Hospital for treatment is false and on the contrary he has visited District Hospital, Tumkur on 16.6.2003 and that his left upper arm was amputated at Abhaya Hospital, Bangalore on 5.6.2003. We entertained a doubt by looking into Ex.P-2 & 3 in regard to the actual incident. We entertained a doubt by looking into Ex.P-2 & 3 in regard to the actual incident. On close examination of the records produced by the claimant it discloses that the claimant had not lodged any complaint before the police. On the contrary, a PCR was filed before the JMFC., Tumkur in PCR No.199/2003 on 26.7.2003, one month 20 days after the incident and based on the same court directed the police to investigate and submit their report under Sec.156(3) of Cr.P.C.. On investigation, police have filed B-Report stating that such an accident had not taken place. Filling of B-Report and filing of alleged complaint under Sec.200 of Cr.P.C. were produced by the insurance company. Inspite of production of these documents, tribunal held that there was an accident. On noticing the documents produced by the respondents as per D-series and the medical records, we directed the respondent-claimant to appear before this court since very filing of the claim petition before the tribunal was based on false allegations. 6. Today respondent-claimant is present before the court. At the first instance, he filed a memo seeking permission to withdraw the claim petition lodged by him on the ground that he is not willing to prosecute the claim petition. Since this court is of the opinion that claim lodged by the claimant was a false claim, we directed him to file an affidavit under what circumstances such a false claim petition was filed. Now an affidavit is filed admitting the mistake committed by him and he tendered unconditional apology and further requested this court to permit him to withdraw the claim petition stating that he will not commit further mistakes in his future life. 7. Normally we would not have accepted such an affidavit, when he has played fraud on the court and also on the insurance company to claim compensation erroneously. However, considering his back-ground that he is a rustic villager and that he has lost his left upper limb and has become disabled, we have to consider unconditional apology tendered by him and permit him to withdraw the claim petition. But at the same time, this court cannot forget the conduct of the persons who are all involved in helping the claimant to get compensation. But at the same time, this court cannot forget the conduct of the persons who are all involved in helping the claimant to get compensation. Though a motor vehicle was not involved, owner of the motor cycle has given his consent to become a party who is none other than the owner of the lathe in whose machine left upper limb of the claimant was crushed and later the same was amputated. In addition to that, it is unfortunate that the doctors have also helped the claimant as if he sustained injuries in a road traffic accident. We would not have unearthed the false case lodged by the claimant provided the claimant had not produced medical records of Abhaya Hospital. As stated supra, even if he had been injured in a lathe, normally he would have taken treatment at Government General Hospital at Tumkur which is very near to Kestur village, but the document produced shows that he has sustained injury in the accident and he was admitted to Hospital on 4.6.2003, his left hand was amputated on 5.6.2003 and he was discharged from the hospital on 6.6.2003. We have also observed that purposely claimant did not produce the case sheet maintained by the Abhaya Hospital, but he has relied upon the disability certificate issued by the said hospital. If the case-sheet maintained by Abhaya Hospital had been produced, it would have been easy for this court to find out on what basis claimant was admitted to the hospital. In other words, purposely claimant has withheld important document. This would show the conduct of the claimant. In addition to that, PCR has been lodged by an advocate who later has filed claim petition knowing fully well the back-ground of this case. Fortunately, in this case police have filed B-Report. 8. It is unfortunate that doctors without considering the actual disability caused to the claimants, for various reasons, are in the habit of issuing false disability certificates exaggerating disability. Even the Hon’ble Members of the Tribunal who will have an opportunity of observing the disability caused to the claimants in the open court, are not evincing any interest to show how such disability is coming in the way of their earning and functional disability. Even the Hon’ble Members of the Tribunal who will have an opportunity of observing the disability caused to the claimants in the open court, are not evincing any interest to show how such disability is coming in the way of their earning and functional disability. It is unfortunate to mention that in some of the cases where the injury is caused to mandible, doctors have opined that the party is suffering from functional disability which has reduced his income. If there is a dis-figurement to the face, this court is at a loss to understand how such evidence can be given by a doctor and such certificates can be issued. Even if such certificates are issued by the doctors. Members of the tribunals cannot close their eyes. They have to apply their mind properly and assess the nature of disability caused to the victim. But either on account of lack of knowledge or for various reasons tribunals are in the habit of awarding exhorbitant compensation in case where claimants do not deserve on account of actual injuries caused to them and in may cases inadequate compensation being granted by the tribunals without assessing the actual disability caused to the victims. Without assessing the evidence properly if compensation is awarded, it will cause great injustice to the claimants wherever inadequate compensation is awarded and similarly if exhorbitant compensation is awarded, insurance companies are made to pay for no fault of them. Therefore, there is a great responsibility on the part of the Hon’ble members of the Tribunals to assess the nature of disability, functional disability and the income while awarding compensation. The court is also observing that the tribunals are not awarding compensation under different headings as they are required to do. But some of the tribunals are in the habit of awarding meager compensation without bifurcating the headings under one head as globle compensation. Such mistakes are to be rectified by the respective tribunals and tribunals shall be more careful and cautious while assessing the disability. But some of the tribunals are in the habit of awarding meager compensation without bifurcating the headings under one head as globle compensation. Such mistakes are to be rectified by the respective tribunals and tribunals shall be more careful and cautious while assessing the disability. This court is also observing in many cases wherein the complaints are lodged alleging that the claimants have sustained injuries in a road traffic accident and some time even in the case of death against an unknown vehicle without investigating the cases properly, drivers of the vehicles who are not involved in the accident are made as accused to enable the claimants to get compensation depending upon the liability of the insurance company and similarly doctors are also in the habit of giving false certificates while assessing the disability as a result of which unscrupulous claimants are claiming exorbitant compensation and on account of the same, insurance companies are sustaining loss and therefore we are of the opinion that it is high-time for the Director General of Police to direct all the police personnel who are in the helm of affairs to investigate the cases properly and file necessary and proper reports as contemplated under Sec.173 of Cr.P.C.. Similarly, it is for the doctors to give proper evidence and assess the disability correctly and they cannot be a tools in the hands of unscrupulous claimants or his supporters. 9. With the above observation, considering the back-ground of the claimant as he has tendered unconditional apology, we allow this appeal by permitting R-1/claimant to withdraw the claim petition. Accordingly, this appeal is allowed. Amount in deposit is ordered to be refunded to the appellant-insurance company. Let the copy of this judgment be sent to the Director General of Police and Prl. Secretary to Health and Family Planning Department and also to the Members of he Tribunals for their guidelines.