1. By way of this appeal, the appellant- original claimant has challenged the judgement and award dated 4.2.1998 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Auxiliary), Sabarkantha, in M.A.C.P. No.162 of 1991, whereby the tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs.1,11,920/- to the claimant, with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
2. The short facts of this case are that on 20.3.1990 one accident occurred and due to which one Gormelsingh Bisakhasingh Jaat, appellant herein, sustained grievous injuries and therefore, he filed claim petition being M.A.C.P. No. 162 of 1991 before the Tribunal. 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 herein above against which the present appeal is filed by the appellant-original claimant.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the Tribunal has committed an error in assessing the monthly income of the appellant. He further submitted that looking to the age of the appellant, the tribunal ought to have adopted the multiplier of 16 instead of 15. He further contended that the Tribunal ought to have awarded Rs.50,000/- under the head of pain, shock and suffering, instead of Rs.35,000/-. Therefore, he prayed to allow this appeal.
4. I have heard learned Learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record. From the record, it is clear that the Tribunal has committed an error in assessing the monthly income of the appellant. The Tribunal ought to have awarded monthly income of the appellant at Rs.1800/-. The disability assessed by the Tribunal is just and appropriate, therefore, the same is not disturbed. Since, the Tribunal has assessed 22% disability for the body as a whole, the appellant is entitled for 22% amount per month from the monthly income of the appellant i.e Rs.396/- per month, and accordingly annually it comes to Rs.4752/-. It also appears from the record that the Tribunal has committed error in adopting the multiplier, as per the decision of the Apex Court in the case of U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Limited and Ors. Vs. Trilok Chandra and Ors. reported in 1996 SCC (4) 362, the multiplier of 15 adopted by the tribunal is on lower side, it should be 16. If the multiplier of 16 is adopted the net amount under the head of future loss of income comes to Rs. 76,032/-[Rs.4752 x 16], whereas the the tribunal has awarded Rs.47,520/- under the head of future loss of income.
5. I also find that the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding compensation under the head of pain shock and suffering. The Tribunal ought to have awarded Rs.50,000/- under the said head, as the appellant has remained in the hospital as a patient for 6 months. Therefore, additional amount of Rs.15,000/- is awarded under the head of pain, shock and suffering.
6. In that view of the matter, the appellant is entitled to additional amount of Rs.43,512/- [ additional amount of Rs.28,512 under the head of future economic loss and Rs.15,000/- under the head of pain, shock and suffering] alongwith interest at the rate of 7 ½ per cent per annum from the date of filing of the application till realization. Rest of the award are just and proper therefore they are not disturbed
7. The judgement and award of the tribunal is modified to the aforesaid extent. The decree be drawn accordingly. present appeal is partly allowed.
pawan (K.S.JHAVERI,J.)