1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surendranagar in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.72 of 1984, whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs.82,600/- to original claimant with running interest at the rate of 12% p.a. from the date of the application till its realization.
2. The facts of the case is that on 21.07.1982, truck No.GTY-3601 was parked in the extreme left side of the road and the appellant was checking the wheels of the said truck and at that time, another truck No.GTD-4857, driven by original opponent No.1 came from behind in rash and negligent manner and dashed with the stationary truck No.GTY-3601. As a result thereof, the appellant sustained grievous injuries. Therefore, the appellant filed claim petition being Motor Accident Claims Petition No.72 of 1984 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Surendranagar 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 the monthly income of the appellant at Rs.1,000/-. He has further contended that the Tribunal ought to have held original opponent No.1 solely liable for the accident.
5. Learned counsel Mr.Parikh for the respondent has supported the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and submitted that no interference is called for and the appeal deserves to be dismissed.
6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
7. So far as the issue of negligence is concerned, the Tribunal, after considering the Panchanama at Exh.53, FIR at Exh.36 and oral evidence of the appellant at Exh.33 has rightly held that the accident was occurred due to composite negligence of the drivers of both the trucks. The Tribunal has rightly held present appellant 20% liable for the accident, considering the fact that the truck was parked on the national highway.
8. So far as the issue of quantum is concerned, the Tribunal has considered monthly income of the appellant at Rs.1,000/-. The Tribunal ought to have considered monthly income of the appellant at Rs.1,500/- as it was admitted fact that he was a transport contractor and he himself has purchased the truck. The Tribunal has rightly considered 25% disability for body as a whole, relying upon the certificate and oral evidence of Dr.Dave. Therefore, monthly loss of future income comes to Rs.375/- and accordingly, annual future income loss at Rs.4,500/-.
9. In my view, the Tribunal has erred in adopting the multiplier of 20 as the age of the appellant was 25 years at the time of accident. Hence, by adopting the multiplier of 18, the total amount for future loss of income comes to Rs.81,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.60,000/- under the said head, therefore, the appellant would be entitled to an additional amount of Rs.21,000/- [Rs.81,000/- - Rs.60,000/-]., but, as the Tribunal has held the appellant 20% liable for the accident, Rs.4,200/- is required to be deducted. Hence, the appellant is entitled for additional amount of Rs.16,800/- under the head of future loss of income.
10. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/- for pain, shock and suffering, Rs.10,000/- for medical treatment charges, Rs.9,000/- for actual loss of income, Rs.2,000/- for transportation charges, Rs.5,000/- for special diet and other miscellaneous charges and Rs.2,250/- for attendant charges. The Tribunal was completely justified in awarding the compensation under theses heads.
11. In that view of the matter, the appellant is entitled to an additional amount of Rs.16,800/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of application till realization. Rest of the award stands unaltered.
12. The appeal is partly allowed. Decree be drawn accordingly.
..mitesh..
[K.S.JHAVERI, J.]