ORDER The appellant-Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. has preferred this appeal against the judgment and award dated 12th February, 2007 passed by District Judge-cum-Motor Vehicle Accident Claim Tribunal, Deoghar in connection with M.V. Claim Case No.10 of 1997, whereby Respondent No.1/Claimant has been directed to be paid compensation to the extent of Rs.5,04,000/with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of institution of the case till the date of realization of the compensation amount. 2. Brief facts of the case is that the claimant had sustained injury in a road accident, which occurred on 28th November, 1996 at about 9:00 a.m. while he was travelling on a Tata Maxi, having Registration No.BR10 8962, from Madhupur to Deoghar. The vehicle was driven rashly and negligently, as a result of which the vehicle fell down near Andhari Gadar. In the incident, one Tufani Mian died and other passengers, including Respondent No.1/Claimant, sustained injuries. It has been disclosed that Respondent No.1/Claimant had sustained fracture injury on his left leg and right ankle. He was taken to Sadar Hospital, Deoghar and from there he was referred to better hospital for his treatment. Thereafter, Respondent No.1 was treated at Anup Memorial Orthopedic Centre and Research Institute, Kankarbag, Patna. He was provided further treatment at All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi. The Respondent No.1/Claimant has also furnished disability certificate issued by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Jamui (Ext.4). As per the disability certificate, the claimant had sustained 50% disability due to the injury sustained on his left leg. 3. It was contended by the claimant before the learned Tribunal that he is trained I.T.I. and he has been working as electrician. His monthly earning is Rs.2,000/per month. On the basis of documents and evidence adduced by the claimant, learned Tribunal has passed the impugned judgment and award and hence this appeal. 4. The appellant has assailed the impugned judgment firstly on the ground that the name of Manoj Kumar Singh is appearing in the charge sheet as witness filed in connection with Jasidih P.S. Case No.195 of 1996. It is pointed out that Jasidih P.S. Case No.195 of 1996 was registered on the basis of information lodged by one Md. Safruddin Mian, who was also travelling on the offending vehicle along with the claimant. It is pointed out that Jasidih P.S. Case No.195 of 1996 was registered on the basis of information lodged by one Md. Safruddin Mian, who was also travelling on the offending vehicle along with the claimant. Manoj Kumar Singh had filed the claim application, disclosing his identity as Manoj Kumar Singh, son of Singheshwar Singh, but the academic certificates and other certificates, related to his skill, as electrician, disclose his name as Jaspal Prasad Singh, son of Singheshwar Prasad Singh. 5. Respondent No.1/Claimant had filed a petition dated 27th November, 2006 for amendment to the main application, seeking incorporation of his alias name as Jaspal Prasad Singh. After perusing the aforesaid documents, the said petition was allowed vide order dated 4th December, 2006 and alias name of Manoj Kumar Singh was incorporated in the main application. 6. All the medical certificates relied upon by the claimant disclose his name as Manoj Kumar Singh, but the documents relating to his education, employment and skill indicate his name as Jaspal Prasad Singh. 7. Second point, which the appellant placed before this Court, is that the disability certificate issued by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Jamui indicates 50% disability, but the learned Tribunal has accepted it to the extent of 100% and, accordingly, calculated the compensation amount to be paid to the claimant. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant has raised serious objection against calculation of compensation amount and the expenses directed to be paid to the claimant towards medical expenditure. Admittedly, the claimant did not produce any medical bills before the learned Tribunal. 9. Learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.1/Claimant has vehemently opposed the argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellant and submitted that the injury sustained by the claimant in the incident is not disputed. He was attended by a doctor at Sadar Hospital, Deoghar, which finds support from Ext.3. The informant of Jasidih P.S. Case No.195 of 1996 has clearly stated that other passengers travelling on that vehicle had also sustained injury. Name of the claimant-Manoj kumar Singh is well appearing in the charge sheet in the column of witnesses. The disability certificate issued by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Jamui also discloses identity of injured as Manoj Kumar Singh. In the medical documents/prescriptions of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, name of the claimant is also mentioned as Manoj Kumar Singh. 10. The disability certificate issued by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Jamui also discloses identity of injured as Manoj Kumar Singh. In the medical documents/prescriptions of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, name of the claimant is also mentioned as Manoj Kumar Singh. 10. Even assuming that Manoj Kumar Singh is not having alias name as Jaspal Prasad Singh, the fact remains that he is the person, who sustained injury in the incident. 11. Learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1/Claimant has submitted that the learned Tribunal has rightly assessed just and reasonable compensation to be paid to the Respondent No.1/Claimant and the impugned judgment and award need no interference. 12. I have gone through the impugned judgment, lower court records and the documents exhibited in this case. It is true that the medical documents/prescriptions relating to the claimant are not tallying with the academic certificates produced by him. All medical documents/prescriptions, which show the treatment provided to the claimant after the incident, disclose the identity as that of Manoj Kumar Singh, but the academic certificates, including other certificates, which have been brought on record to prove his skill that he was working as electrician, go to show the identity of a person known as Jaspal Prasad Singh, son of Singheshwar Prasad Singh. In this regard, I do accept the submission that even disbelieving the academic certificates to be that of the claimant, the fact remains that he is the person who sustained injury in the incident and, therefore, he is entitled for compensation. If the certificates, which have been brought on record to prove the skill of the Respondent No.1/Claimant, are considered or looked into with doubt then the monthly income, which the Tribunal has accepted, will also come within doubt and it cannot be considered as conclusive proof. There appears substance in the argument advanced by learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the Tribunal has wrongly accepted the disability to the extent of 100%, whereas the disability certificate furnished by the claimant itself indicates 50% disability. 13. In the circumstances, without going to do further exercise to calculate as to what would be the actual compensation amount, I feel, if a sum of Rs.3.00 lacs with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the application till final realization of the compensation amount is paid, it will serve the purpose. 14. 13. In the circumstances, without going to do further exercise to calculate as to what would be the actual compensation amount, I feel, if a sum of Rs.3.00 lacs with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the application till final realization of the compensation amount is paid, it will serve the purpose. 14. In the result, as indicated above, the appellant-Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. is directed to pay Rs.3.00 lacs with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of application till the date of final realization of the compensation amount to the Respondent No.1/Claimant within sixty days from today. 15. With the above modification in the impugned judgment and award, this appeal stands partly allowed. 16. However, Respondent No.1/Claimant shall be entitled to withdraw statutory amount of Rs.25,000/deposited by the appellant-Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. at the time of presenting the appeal and that sum of Rs.25,000/shall be deducted from the total calculated compensation amount to be paid to the claimant. Appeal partly allowed.