Mr.
Amit Patel, learned counsel states that he has instructions to appear on behalf of respondent no. 1.
2. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 12.02.1996 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal No. 1, Ahmedabad in M.A.C.P. No. 54 of 1991, whereby the claim petition was partly allowed and the original claimants were awarded total compensation of Rs.57,000/- along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of the application till its realization.
3. The facts in brief are that on 04.03.1991 at around 1030 hrs., while the appellant was going on his Luna, at a particular place, a car bearing no. GJ-1-7280 on account of rash and negligent manner dashed the Luna from behind. As a result of which, the appellant sustained severe bodily injuries. Later on, the appellant filed claim petition, which came to be partly allowed, by way of the impugned award. The appellant has preferred the present appeal claiming for enhancement of the amount of compensation.
4. Heard learned counsel for respective parties and perused the documents on record. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that the Tribunal has not considered the law laid down by the Apex Court while computing income under the head of future loss. Except under the head of future loss of income, the appellant has not prayed for enhancement on any other grounds.
5. It appears that the Tribunal assessed the monthly income of the appellant at Rs3,200/- on the basis of the averment made in the claim petition. However, while calculating the prospective income, the Tribunal did not adopt the formula laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma (Smt.) & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr. (2009) 6 SCC 122.
By adopting the principle laid down in the above decision, the monthly income of the appellant would come to Rs.4,800/-. So far as the disability is concerned, the Medical Certificate assessed the permanent functional loss at 29.5%. In my opinion, the permanent disability could not have been assessed at 14.75% for the body as a whole when the Medical Certificate assessed the permanent functional loss at 29.5%. Accordingly, the monthly loss of income would come to Rs.708/-. Considering the age of the appellant at the relevant time, the appropriate multiplier would be 16. Therefore, the appellant shall be entitled for additional amount of Rs.1,35,936/- as income under the head of future loss. However, the claim is restricted to Rs.50,000/- the appellant shall be entitled for additional amount of Rs.50,000/- only under the head of future loss of income. So far as income assessed under the other heads are concerned, the same are not interfered with and are, accordingly, confirmed.
6. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent that the appellant shall be entitled for additional compensation of Rs.50,000/- over and above the compensation already awarded by the Tribunal along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of application till its realization. Rest of the impugned award remains unaltered. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
[K.S.
JHAVERI, J.] /phalguni/ Top