1. This Civil 1st Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.11.2011 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jammu, whereby an award of Rs. 27,00,000/- along with 7.5% interest (except the component nos. 1,5, 7, 9,11 & 13 as detailed in the award) came to be awarded in favour of claimant and against the insurer-insurance company from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization (for short, impugned award), on the grounds taken in the memo of appeal. 2. Claimant Sushma Jasrotia being the victim of vehicular accident filed a claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jammu for grant of compensation to the tune of rupees twenty five lacs on the ground that on 12.08.2008 when she was traveling on a Motor Cycle bearing registration No. JK02U-5866 from Jammu towards Samba, a vehicle (Maruti Car) bearing registration No. JK02 W-7449 came from opposite direction and hit the Motor Cycle near Sindbari NHW, Tehsil Samba, as a result of which the claimant sustained grievous injuries due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of offending vehicle. She was taken to Sub District Hospital, Samba, from where she was referred to Government Medical College, Jammu in view of her critical condition. The claimant was a Centre Government Employee and was serving as a Sub Post Master in Post Office Hira Nagar at the time of accident. 3. Appellant-insurer filed objections and contested the claim petition. Owner as well as driver of the offending vehicle did not contest the claim petition and they were set ex parte. The following issues came to be framed. "1. Whether the accident took place on 12.8.2008 at Sindhbari NHW Tehsil Samba by the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle No. JK02W-7449 in the hands of erring driver in which petitioner sustained grievous injuries? OPP 2. If issue No. 1 is proved in affirmative, whether petitioner is entitled to the compensation; if so to what amount and from whom? OPP 3. Whether driver of offending vehicle at the time of accident was not holding a valid and effective driving license and drove the vehicle in violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy, if so how? OPR-1. 4. Relief? O. P. Parties" 4. The claimant was directed to lead evidence. She examined PWs Pankaj Bandral, Ramesh Chander, Narottam Singh, Dr. Whether driver of offending vehicle at the time of accident was not holding a valid and effective driving license and drove the vehicle in violation of terms and conditions of insurance policy, if so how? OPR-1. 4. Relief? O. P. Parties" 4. The claimant was directed to lead evidence. She examined PWs Pankaj Bandral, Ramesh Chander, Narottam Singh, Dr. S. K. Gupta and Dr. Vinay Khajuria in support of her claim. The claimant though also appeared before the Tribunal to record her statement, but neither she could express nor manage herself, therefore, her statement could not be recorded. Claimant has also placed on record the medical bills/vouchers approximately amounting to Rs. 4,66,000/-. 5. Appellant-insurer did not led any evidence, therefore, the evidence led by the claimant have remained unrebutted. 6. Issue no. 1. While going through the memo of appeal one comes to an inescapable conclusion that the appellant-insurer has not questioned the factum of accident as well as rash and negligent driving of the driver of offending vehicle. Further, I have gone through the statements recorded by the learned Tribunal and the record. There is sufficient evidence on the file which shows that the claimant has succeeded in proving that the accident was the result of rash and negligent driving of the driver of offending vehicle. Thus, the Tribunal has rightly decided issue no. 1 in favour of claimant and against the appellant-insurer as well as owner and driver of the offending vehicle. 7. Before examining issue no. 2, I deem it proper to take issue no. 3 at this stage. 8. It was for the appellant-insurer to prove that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding valid and effective driving license at the time of accident, rather was driving the vehicle in violation of the terms and conditions of the insurance policy. Appellant has failed to prove the same. There is no record on the file which can be made basis for holding that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding valid and effective driving license or has committed any willful breach. Thus, the findings returned on issue no. 3 are also upheld. 9. Now coming to issue no.2. Learned counsel for appellant argued that the compensation awarded is excessive. 10. I have gone through the findings recorded by the learned Tribunal as also examined the statements made by the doctors, namely, Dr. Thus, the findings returned on issue no. 3 are also upheld. 9. Now coming to issue no.2. Learned counsel for appellant argued that the compensation awarded is excessive. 10. I have gone through the findings recorded by the learned Tribunal as also examined the statements made by the doctors, namely, Dr. S. K. Gupta as well as Dr. Vinay Khajuria. It has been stated that the victim was not able to express or manage herself as she has become a physical wreck and burden on others. The accident has shattered the physical frame of claimant. She was advised physiotherapy throughout her life. Both the doctors have proved the disability certificate EXPW-VK. 11. PW Narottam Singh has specifically stated that due to the physical condition of the claimant, she was forced to take voluntary retirement with effect from 01.09.2011 when 7 years and 3 months of her service was still left. 12. The Tribunal after examining the entire case and in view of the statements made by the doctors has rightly awarded a compensation of rupees twenty seven lacs in favour of claimant under different heads. However, since the claimant has herself claimed a total compensation of rupees twenty lacs in the claim petition, therefore, I deem it proper to reduce rupees two lacs under the head loss of future earnings. 13. In the given circumstances, it is held that the claimant is entitled to a total compensation of rupees twenty five lacs with 7.5% interest from the date of filing of the claim petition under the heads pain and suffering; loss of amenities of life; medical expenses incurred; transport charges incurred; attendant charges incurred, physiotherapy charges incurred and expenses incurred on special diet. For rest of the amount, i.e., under the heads loss of future earnings; future medical expenses; future transport charges; future attendant charges; future expenses to be incurred on physiotherapy and expenses to be incurred on special diet, the claimant is held entitled to interest at the rate of 7.5% from the date of award, i.e., 21.11.2011. The awarded amount be released in favour of the claimant through account payees cheque strictly in terms of the conditions as contained in the impugned award after proper verification and identification. Excess amount be released in favour of appellant-insurance company through account payees cheque. 14. The impugned award is, accordingly, modified and appeal stands disposed of. 15. The awarded amount be released in favour of the claimant through account payees cheque strictly in terms of the conditions as contained in the impugned award after proper verification and identification. Excess amount be released in favour of appellant-insurance company through account payees cheque. 14. The impugned award is, accordingly, modified and appeal stands disposed of. 15. Send down the record forthwith along with a copy of this order.