This First Appeal is at the instance of an applicant under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act and is directed against an award dated January 5, 2002 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bharuch in MACP Case No.154 of 1991 thereby awarding a sum of Rs.1,96,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the application till realisation. 2. Being dissatisfied, the claimant has come up with the present appeal.
3. It appears that due to negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle, the appellant met with an accident, as a result, there was amputation of his left leg. According to the claimant, he was aged 45 years at the time of accident and used to earn Rs.750/- a month as a Labourer.
4. After taking into consideration the aforesaid aspect, the Tribunal was of the view that it was a fit case where a total sum of Rs.1,96,000/- should be awarded with proportionate costs and interest, as indicated earlier.
5. Being dissatisfied, the claimant has come up with the present appeal.
6. None appears on behalf of the Insurance company, in spite of service.
7. After hearing the learned advocate for the appellant and after going through the materials on record, it appears that monthly income of the victim was Rs.750/- a month. By awarding a sum of Rs.1,96,000/-, the Tribunal has made arrangement of earning double the said amount by fixing the said amount in a nationalised bank. It appears that the Tribunal has applied multiplier of 13 and arrived at a figure of Rs.1,17,000/- and further awarded Rs.25,000/- towards pain, shock and suffering and further Rs.20,000/- towards loss of amenities and happiness and further Rs.20,000/- towards disfigurement. Rs.6,000/- was added for attendant charges and Rs.2500/- towards medical expenses. In addition to the aforesaid amount, Rs.2500/- was given as special diet and Rs.1500/- towards loss of income for two months. The Tribunal also awarded Rs.1500/- towards conveyance charges.
8. I find that total amount of Rs.1,96,000/- awarded for a man aged 45 years having income of Rs.750/- a month cannot be said to be unreasonable having regard to the fact that he has lost one of his legs. I thus find no reason to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal.
9. The appeal is, thus, devoid of any substance and is consequently dismissed. In the facts and circumstances, there will be no order as to costs.
(BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA,CJ) zgs