[1] By way of present appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and award dated 13.04.2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Vadodara in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.238 of 1996, whereby the learned Tribunal awarded in all compensation of Rs.1,31,100/- along with proportionate costs and interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a in favour of the original claimant from the date of petition till payment or realization from the opponents jointly and severally.
[2] As per the case of the claimant before the learned Tribunal, on 20.11.1995, the appellant in his rickshaw with passengers was driving the same from Gujarat Refinery to Vadodara, and at that time the accident took place. In the said accident, the appellant was seriously injured. The appellant, therefore, claimed an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- from the opponents jointly and severally. The Tribunal after hearing the parties, passed the aforesaid award in the main claim petition.
[3] Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred partly allowing the claim petition of the appellant and awarding sum of Rs.1,33,1000/- only against the claim of Rs.5,00,000/-. He submitted that the tribunal has erred in considering income of Rs.1500/- p.a on the date of accident, even though the deceased was earning Rs.3,000/- p.a as a rickshaw driver. He submitted that the tribunal has committed an error in assessing and considering disability at 30% of body as a whole. He submitted that the tribunal has erred in applying multiplier of 15 only as at that time, the appellant was aged about 35 years. He submitted that the tribunal erred in assessing actual loss of income of Rs.18,000/- for 12 months instead of Rs.39,000/- for 13 months. He further submitted that the tribunal ought to have awarded medical expenses, and conveyance at Rs.4,100/-.
[4] Heard learned advocate for the parties.
[5] I have perused the record of the case along with the impugned award passed by the Tribunal. As regards income and future income the learned advocate for the appellant is not in a position to point out anything from the record, the same are just and proper. In the present case, so far as the head of future loss of the income is concerned, the Tribunal has considered Rs.1,500/- p.m. income of the injured, considering the accident took place in the year 1995. After considering 30% permanent partial disability Rs.450/- has been considered as future loss of income and yearly it would come to Rs.5,400/-. The Tribunal has applied 15 multiplier considering his age of 35 at the time of accident. However, I am of the view that looking to the facts and circumstances, the multiplier should have been 16 in view of the decision in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt.) and others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 6 SCC 121.
[6] After applying 16 multiplier to the yearly income of Rs.5,400/- as considered by the Tribunal that the amount would come to Rs.86,400/-. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.81,000/- and, therefore, the claimant is entitled to the additional compensation of Rs.5,400/- [Rs.86,400 – Rs.81,000] along with the interest at the rate of Rs.7.5% p.a. from the date of application. Accordingly, it is held that the claimant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.5,400/- along with interest at the rate of 7.5% p.a from the date of application. The award is modified accordingly. Appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs.
[ K. S. JHAVERI, J. ] vijay