1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Junagadh in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.757 of 1990, whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs.32,250/- to appellant-original claimant with running interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of the application till its realization.
2. This claim petition arise out of the vehicular accident, which occurred on 23.11.1989 on Junagadh-Rajkot road between ST bus No.GQF-8956 and truck No.RNG-3813. As a result, the appellant sustained injuries. Therefore, the appellants filed claim petition before the Tribunal for compensation.
3. The Tribunal, after hearing learned advocate for the parties and after considering the evidence produced on record, decided the claim petition and passed the award as stated herein above, against which present appeal is preferred.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the Tribunal has erred in assessing monthly income of the appellant at Rs.1,500/-. He has submitted that the Tribunal has assessed monthly loss of income at Rs.50/-, which is contrary to the evidence produced on record. He has further submitted that the Tribunal ought to have considered that the appellant could not work for 10 months and therefore, actual loss of income granted by the Tribunal is on lower side.
5. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the record.
6. So far as the issue of negligence is concerned, the Tribunal relying upon the FIR at Exh.33 and Panchanama at Exh.34, rightly held both the vehicles equally negligent for the accident. The Tribunal has discussed this aspect in Paragraph No.5 of the judgment and in my view the Tribunal was completely justified in assessing both the vehicles equally negligent for the accident.
7. So far as the issue of quantum is concerned, the Tribunal, in absence of any documentary evidence has assessed the monthly income of the appellant at Rs.1,500/-. In my view the Tribunal ought to have considered the prospective income of the appellant. The prospective income of the appellant comes to Rs.2,250/- [Rs.1500/- X 3 = Rs.4500/-, Rs.4500 / 2 = Rs.2250/-], considering the ratio laid down by Apex Court in case of Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another reported in 2009(6) SCC 121.
8. The Tribunal, relying upon the documentary evidence at Exh.87, 89 and 124, rightly held 20% disability body as a whole of the appellant. Therefore, the appellant is entitled for monthly
adopted. Hence, the appellant is entitled for Rs.91,800/- under the head of future loss of income.
9. Further, the appellant is entitled for Rs.15,000/- under the head of Pain, Shock and Suffering and Rs.20,000/- under the head of treatment expenses. Moreover, the appellant is entitled for Rs.15,750/- [Rs.2,250/- X 7 = Rs.15,750/- under the head of actual salary loss for 7 months. Hence, the appellant would be entitled for Rs.1,42,550/-, but, as both the vehicles were equally liable for the accident, the appellant is entitled for Rs.71,275/-. The Tribunal has already awarded Rs.32,250/- to the appellant, therefore, the appellant is entitled for additional amount of Rs.39,025/-, rounded to Rs.39,000/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of application till realization. Rest of the award stands unaltered.
10. The appeal is partly allowed. Decree be drawn accordingly.
..mitesh..
[K.S.JHAVERI, J.]