1. By way of this appeal, the present appellant-original claimant has challenged the judgement and award dated 28.04.1999, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Auxi.), Bhavnagar, in M.A.C.P. No.674 of 1996, whereby the tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs.92,500/- to the claimant with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of application till realization.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that in an vehicular accident, Abdulmiya Razakmiya Saiyed, appellant herein, sustained grievous injuries and therefore, he filed claim petition being M.A.C.P. No.674 of 1996 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, for compensation. The learned tribunal after hearing learned advocates for both the parties and after recording the evidence decided the claim petition and passed the award as stated hereinabove against which the present appeal is preferred by the appellant-original claimant.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the tribunal has committed an error in assessing the income of the appellant. He further submitted that the Tribunal has wrongly attributed the contributory negligence.
4. He further contended that the Tribunal ought to have assessed 100% disability, instead of 33%. In support of his contention, he relied upon the decision of the Apex Court, in the case of Mohan Soni Vs. Ramavtar Tomar and Ors, reported in (2012) 2 SCC 267. He further contended that the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is on lower side, it should be 18.
5. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondents have opposed the appeal and have prayed to dismiss the same, as being without merit.
6. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and perused the record as well as the judgement and award of the tribunal. I find that the Tribunal has committed an error in assessing the income of the appellant. The Tribunal ought to have assessed the monthly income of the appellant at Rs.3000/-. The disability assessed by the Tribunal is just and proper, in view of the fact that the doctor has assessed 33% disability, therefore, it will not be appropriate to disturb the same. In that view of the matter, if Rs. 3000/- is taken as monthly income of the appellant coupled with disability of 33%, the monthly future loss of income comes to Rs.990/- and accordingly annually, it comes to Rs.11880/-.
7. I also find that the multiplier adopted by the Tribunal is on lower side. In view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Varma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation Ltd. and Anr. reported in 2009(6) SCC, 121, the tribunal ought to have adopted the multiplier of 18, instead of 16. If multiplier of 18 is adopted, the amount under the head of future loss of income comes to Rs. 2,13,840/-. Over and above, the appellant is also entitled to Rs.25,000/- under the head of Medical expenses, Rs.10,000/- under the head of pain, shock and suffering, Rs.6000/- under the head of actual loss of income, Rs.2000/- for nutrition, Rs.3000/- under the head of attendant charges, Rs.4280/- under the head of transportation and Rs.8000/- under the head of marriage prospects, as awarded by the Tribunal. The total compensation amount comes to Rs.2,72,120/-.
8. So far as the negligence part is concerned, the Tribunal after considering the FIR and Panchanama has observed that the accident has occurred due to head on collusion of both the vehicles and there was sufficient width to pass two heavy vehicles from opposite direction. The Tribunal further contended that the accident has occurred in the centre of the road. Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has attributed the negligence on the part of the appellant to the extent of 50%. I am in complete agreement with the view taken by the Tribunal. Since, the Tribunal has attributed the negligence on the part of the appellant to the extent of 50%, he will be entitled for 50% amou8nt from the total compensation.
9. Thus, in all the appellant is entitled to Rs.1,36,060/-, whereas the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 92,500/-. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to additional amount of Rs.43,560/- alongwith interest at the rate of 7 ½ per cent from the date of filing of the application till realization.
10. The decision relied upon by the learned advocate for the appellant will not apply to the facts of the facts of the present case.
11. The judgement and award of the tribunal is modified to the aforesaid extent. The decree be drawn accordingly. present appeal is partly allowed.
[K.S.JHAVERI,J.] pawan Top