JUDGMENT
S.S. Sodhi, J.
1. The challenge in appeal here is to the award of Rs. 9,338/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in an accident with the tractor PUP-8158.
2. The incident in the present case took place on September 9, 1979 at about 11.15 A.M. in front of house No. 466 in Sector 15-A, Chandigarh. Major Sukh Dayal Sharma and his wife were coming on scooter on their correct side of the road when the tractor, while being reversed, knocked down the scooter. No serious injury was caused thereby to either Major Sukh Dayal Sharma or his wife. The claimant, however, insisted that the tractor be left at the spot as he wanted to report the matter to the police. An altercation then ensured between the claimant and Mohan Lal the driver of the tractor and Daya Krishan, who also came there at that time. Different accounts of what happened thereafter have been given by the claimant and by Daya Krishan and Mohan Lal. According to the claimant, Daya Krishan sat on the driver’s seat and suddenly started the tractor as a result of which he was run over by the rear wheel thereof and sustained serious injuries. Mohan Lal and Daya Krishan, on the other hand, took the plea that the tractor started as the result of the negligence of the claimant himself when he fiddled with the gear lever as a result of which the tractor took a jump and the claimant fell down and came under the wheel of the tractor.
3. The case of the claimant rests upon the testimony of PW 3-Ganga Bishan Sharma, who happened to be passing by and witnessed the accident. Besides there is the statement of the claimant himself as PW 1 Major Sukh Dayal Sharma. As opposed to this, there is the testimony of RW 1-Kirpal Singh and RW 2 Mohan Lal.
4. The point in controversy between the parties is mainly with regard to the starting of the tractor after the scooter had earlier been hit by it, namely; whether it was started by Daya Krishan or it was on account of the act of the claimant himself in fiddling with the gear lever that it started moving. There is an inherent implausibility in the story put-forth by the tractor-driver and his witness. As is well known, in order to change gears of a tractor, the clutch must be pressed and what is more, common experience shows that gears of the tractor are not so light that with a mere touch, they can be changed from one gear to another. A certain amount of effort is required for this purpose. The version, that the tractor took a jump when the claimant fiddled with the gear lever, cannot, therefore, be accepted.
5. Taking an over-all view of the evidence on record and the circumstances in which the accident occurred, no exception can indeed be taken to the finding of the Tribunal that the accident had been caused due to the rash and negligent driving of the appellant-Daya Krishan.
6. As regards the quantum of compensation awarded, it would, on the face of it, appear to be very much on the lower side considering the nature and extent of the injuries suffered by the claimant in this accident. The passing of the wheel over the claimant resulted in a fracture of the pelvis, on account of which he had to remain admitted in the Post Graduate Institute, Chandigarh, for over two months and had to move around with clutches for about three months after January 1980. Fie must have incurred considerable expenses on his treatment too, over and above the amount that may have been reimbursed to him by the government, besides the cost of transportation that was rendered imperative for him on account of his injuries. As was noticed by the Tribunal there was also considerable damage to his scooter too. Considering all these matters, the claimant in fact deserved to have been awarded a considerably larger sum, but as he has not chosen to file any appeal or cross-objections no enhanced compensation can be granted to him in appeal here. Be that as it may, there is certainly no warrant for any reduction in the amount awarded.
7. This appeal is accordingly hereby dismissed with costs. Counsel fee Rs. 500/-.