1. By way of this appeal, the appellants- original opponent No.2 has challenged the judgement and award dated 30.01.1999, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal(Main), Surat, in M.A.C.P. No. 490 of 1990, whereby the tribunal has awarded compensation in the sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to the claimant with interest at the rate of 12% from the date of filing of the petition till realization.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are that on 06.03.1990, one Gurmitsingh Uttamsingh Dindyala, present respondent No.1 was walking in Kachacha road. When he reached near the place of accident, at that time one S.T. bus bearing registration No.8084 came from Bardoli Railway Station in full speed and dashed the present respondent. As a result of the said accident, the respondent No.1 sustained grievous injuries therefore, he filed claim petition being M.A.C.P. No.490 of 1990 before the Tribunal for compensation. The Tribunal after hearing learned advocates for the respective parties and after considering the evidence on record decided the claim petition and passed the award as stated hereinabove against which the present appeal is preferred by the appellants-original opponent No.2.
3. Learned Counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding compensation to the claimant. The tribunal failed to appreciate the material on record in its true perspective. Therefore, he prayed to allow this appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent has supported the judgement and award of the Tribunal and submitted that the Tribunal after considering the evidence on record has passed the award. Therefore, he prayed to dismiss the present appeal.
5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the appellants 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 monthly income of the claimant at Rs.10,000/-. However, from the documents more particularly the assessment orders and income tax return, it is clear that Rs.10,000/- monthly income assessed by the Tribunal is on higher side. It should not be more than Rs.5000/- per month. If we consider the monthly income of the claimant at Rs.5000/-. Since, the claimant has sustained 5% disability, he is entitled to 5% amount from the injury which he sustained. Therefore, the said 5% amount comes to Rs. 250/- and accordingly annually it comes to Rs.3000/-. The multiplier of 12 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 multiplier of 14 would be just and proper. If the multiplier of 14 is adopted in the present case, the loss of income would come to Rs.42,000/-. I also find that the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding compensation under different heads. Therefore, the compensation awarded under different heads is required to be reduced. I am of the opinion that If Rs.20,000/-under the head of pain shock and suffering, Rs.15,000/- under the head of funeral expenses Rs.10,000/- under the head of actual loss of salary, Rs.6,000/- under the head of transportation are granted, the same would met ends of justices.
6. In that view of the matter, the claimant is only entitled to Rs.42,000/- under the head of future loss of income + RS.20,000/- under the head of Pain, shock and suffering + Rs.15,000/- under the head of funeral expenses + Rs.10,000/- under the head of actual loss of salary and + Rs.6000/- under the head of transportation. Thus, in all the claimant is entitled to Rs.93,000/- whereas the Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,50,000/- . Therefore, the excess amount of Rs. 57,000/- will be refunded to the appellant-Corporation interest and cost, if any, if the same is deposited by the appellant with the tribunal.
7. The judgement and award of the tribunal is modified to the aforesaid extent. Decree be drawn accordingly. The present appeal is partly allowed.
[K.S.JHAVERI,J.] pawan