Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 660 (JK)

Ritu Kumari v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

2016-12-15

R.SUDHAKAR

body2016
JUDGMENT : R. SUDHAKAR, J. 1. The appellant-petitioner filed Claim Petition No. 486, before the Tribunal seeking compensation for the injury suffered by her in the accident. The Tribunal while disposing of the said claim petition passed the award which reads as follows: "The claim of the petitioner was that she was six years old at the time of the accident. The injuries sustained by her in the accident have not been itself mentioned in the claim petition. In support of the injuries a reference has been made to the certificate issued by BMO Sub-district Hospital Sunderbani. After going through this certificate it is observed by the Tribunal that the petitioner on examination was found to have suffered small abrasion on the lateral side of right knee joint and on the back right elbow joint. According to the certificate the injuries were simple in nature. But after going through the disability certificate "EXPW-RS" and the statement of Dr. Rakesh Sharma who issued the same on 13.11.1997, the same makes mention of injury to the left elbow and left knee soft tissue injury sustained by the petitioner. The parentage and the residence of the petitioner have not been mentioned as deposed by her father; still no award can be awarded to her in the light of the medical evidence on the record. It is further noticed that petitioner had deliberately made false claim of Rs. 50,000/- for disfiguration of her face (Para 18D of the claim petition). When in the proceedings part of the claim petition, the petitioner has not mentioned such injury nor such injuries were noticed by Block Medical Officer Sunderbani who issued the disability certificate. Accordingly this claim petition is dismissed and interim award if received by returned to insurance company with interest @ 9% per annum from the date, if was paid till liquidation." 2. The appellant has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of the award of the Tribunal. According to the appellant, the Tribunal has granted Rs. 50,000/- only as compensation and she seeks modification of the award by passing reasonable, just and appropriate order. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. The appellant has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of the award of the Tribunal. According to the appellant, the Tribunal has granted Rs. 50,000/- only as compensation and she seeks modification of the award by passing reasonable, just and appropriate order. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. The Tribunal after noticing the contradictions in the documents annexed with the claim and the statements made before the Tribunal held that the appellant has failed to prove the nature of the injures claimed nor the Doctor who has issued the disability certificate has noticed such injuries. Hence the appellant has failed to prove that she sustained such injuries in the accident. 5. The Tribunal was justified in dismissing the claim petition because the appellant had failed to prove the injures alleged to have been suffered in the accident. The doctor who issued the disability certificate has also not noticed the injuries. Moreover, the disability certificate issued by the Block Medical Officer Sunderbani is not annexed with the appeal. In view of the matter, the appeal is dismissed and the finding of the Tribunal is confirmed.