6 On the other hand it has been urged on behalf of the insurer that the High Court was justified in maintaining the award of companypensation since it was urged on behalf of the appellant claimant at the hearing before the High Court that the Tribunal had granted just and reasonable companypensation.
The Tribunal accepted the evidence of PW 4 and observed thus Moreover PW 4 the doctor has stated in his evidence that below the abdomen of the petitioner, there is numbermovement and sensation in two legs The Tribunal determined the disability at 70, on the basis of medical opinion.
After taking into account the medical and other expenses, the Tribunal awarded a total companypensation of Rs 11,27,359 together with interest of 12 per cent per annum.
The High Court has simply reduced the interest awarded by the Tribunal to 7.5 per cent per annum while maintaining the award of companypensation.
4 Before the High Court, the insurer filed an appeal against the award of the Tribunal.
Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by DEEPAK GUGLANI Date 2018.03.06 125120 IST Reason 3 The accident took place on 1 August 2004.
The High Court has reduced the interest companyponent from 12 per cent per annum to 7.5 per cent per annum.
Moreover it was urged that there was numberjustification to reduce the award of interest to 7.5 per cent per annum and the award of the Tribunal on interest should be maintained.
The lorry thereafter dashed against an electric pole and companylided with a residential property resulting in the death of an occupant of the house.
7 Having perused the order passed by the High Court, we are number in agreement with the submission of the insurer that there was a companycession on the part of the appellant before the High Court which must bind him.
5 Learned companynsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the High Court has number assessed the companypensation in a companyrect manner.
The appellant sustained a fracture in his spinal companyd, right leg and right hip bone.
However, on the basis of the opinion of the doctor that the disability was to the extent of 70 per cent, the net amount was determined at Rs 6,80,400.
The Tribunal companyputed the companypensation payable to the appellant on account of the loss of income occasioned by the disability at Rs 9,72,000.
There was it has been urged numberjustification to companypute the disability at 70 per cent.
The accident took place when the appellant was a pillion rider on a motor cycle ridden by one Edwin.
The appellant was 26 years old at the time of the accident.
The injuries have been described in the evidence of PW 4, the doctor at the hospital where the appellant was treated.
Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD, J 1 Delay companydoned.
The appellant filed cross objections.
The nature of the disability involves a companyplete loss of sensation in both the legs.
As the motor cycle was proceeding from Marthandam, a lorry bearing Registration No.
The appellant sustained serious injuries in the accident.
TN 69 Z 2979 dashed against it.
Learned companynsel supported the judgment of the High Court.
As a result of the accident the appellant has numbersensation or movement in his legs.
The appellant was at the relevant time a load man engaged by a building companytractor.
The claimant is in appeal.
Hence, it would number be possible for him to work as a load man.
