1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.27 of 1990, whereby the Tribunal has awarded Rs.40,200/- to appellant-original claimant, with the direction that the appellant would be entitled for 12% interest on Rs.20,400/- from the date of main petition and appellant would not be entitled for any interest on the amount of Rs.19,800/- as it was awarded under the head of future economic loss.
2. This claim petition arise out of the vehicular accident, which occurred on 28.01.1989, while the applicant was going on his bicycle and one rickshaw No.GTH-8353 came from behind and dashed with the bicycle. As a result, the appellant sustained injuries. Therefore, the appellant 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.650/-, the Tribunal ought to have considered the income, which was earning by the appellant by doing overtime. He has further submitted that the Tribunal has given the multiplier of 15, which is on lower side.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. So far as the issue of negligence is concerned, the Tribunal relying upon the FIR at Exh.58, the Panchanama at Exh.55 and the oral evidence of the appellant at Exh.60 rightly held original opponent No.1 solely 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 has relied upon the salary slip of the appellant produced vide Exh.57 and assessed the monthly income of the appellant at Rs.650/-, but, the Tribunal has not considered prospective income. Therefore, considering the prospective income of the appellant, monthly income of the appellant can be assessed at Rs.975/-. The Tribunal was justified in assessing 17% permanent disability body as a whole. Therefore, the appellant is entitled for monthly future loss of income at Rs.165.75 [17% of Rs.975/-] and annual future income loss at Rs.1,989/-. The Tribunal has adopted the multiplier of 15, but, considering the age of the appellant, the Tribunal ought to have adopted the multiplier of 16.Hence, the appellant is entitled for Rs.31,824/- under the head of future loss of income. The Tribunal has already awarded Rs.19,800/- under the said head, therefore, the appellant is entitled for additional amount of Rs.12,024/-. Further, the Tribunal was justified in awarding the compensation under other heads. Hence, no interference in other heads are required.
8. The appeal is partly allowed. The appellant is entitled for additional amount of Rs.12,024/- with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of application till realization. Rest of the award stands unaltered. Decree be drawn accordingly.
..mitesh..
[K.S.JHAVERI, J.]