1. These appeals have been preferred against the common judgment and award dated 23.01.2001 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal [Main] BhujKutch, in M.A.C.P. No. 408/1992 and 409/1992, whereby the claim petitions were partly allowed and the original claimants were awarded total compensation of Rs.94,000/ and Rs.1,28,600/ together with costs and interest @ 12% per annum from the date of the application till its realization.
2. The facts in brief are that on 26.04.1992 at around 0930 hrs., while the appellant was travelling in a Rickshaw along with his family members, at a particular place, a Rickshaw bearing no. GJ12T6510, in a rash and negligent manner came from the opposite direction and dashed with the Rickshaw in which the claimants were travelling, as a result of which, the claimants sustained severe bodily injuries. In the said accident the son of the appellant succumbed to the injuries. The appellants original claimants have therefore preferred claim petitions, which came to be partly allowed, by way of the impugned award.
3. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. So far as First Appeal No. 2424 of 2002 [M.A.C.P. No. 409/1992] is concerned, it has been mainly contended that the amount of awarded under different heads while awarding compensation is on lower side. Having gone through the impugned award, I find that the Tribunal has dealt with every aspect of the case in detail. The Tribunal appreciated the evidence on record in its proper perspective and has awarded compensation, which, in my view, is just, legal and appropriate. Learned counsel for the appellant was not in a position to point out from the impugned award as to where the Tribunal has committed any illegality or impropriety while deciding the claim petition. I am in complete agreement with the reasonings given by the Tribunal in its award and hence, find no reasons to entertain this appeal.
4. So far as First Appeal No. 2425/2002 [M.A.C.P. No. 408/1992] is concerned, the main ground under which the appellants have prayed for enhancement of the amount of compensation is that though the Tribunal has believed the monthly income at Rs.1500/, it has not taken into consideration the future loss of income while calculating the amount of compensation.
5. Having gone through the impugned award, I find substance in the submission made on behalf of the appellants since the Tribunal has not calculated income under the head of future loss while calculating the amount of compensation. By adopting the principle of doubling the income and then taking its average, as laid down by the Apex Court in its recent decision, the income would come to Rs.2250/. 20% disability of the said amount would come to Rs.450/ per month and annually Rs.5,400/. By adopting multiplier of 17, the total income would come to Rs.91,800/. However, the Tribunal has awarded only Rs.57,600/ under the said head. Therefore, the claimant shall be entitled for an additional amount of Rs.34,200/ together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum instead of 12% as awarded by the Tribunal.
6. For the foregoing reasons, the following order is passed.
(i) First Appeal No. 2424/2002 is hereby dismissed.
(ii) First Appeal No. 2425/2003 is partly allowed. The impugned award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent that the appellant, original claimant, shall be entitled for an additional amount of Rs.32,400/ together with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum and proportionate costs thereon. Rest of the impugned award remains unaltered. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
[K.S. JHAVERI, J.] /phalguni/