JUDGMENT :

S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J.

1. M.F.A. No. 6420/2018 is preferred by the Insurance company against the impugned judgment and award dated 14.03.2018 passed in MVC No. 2346/2017, whereby the Tribunal awarded compensation in a sum of Rs. 9,24,100/- together with interest at 7.5% p.a. on account of the injuries sustained by the claimant in a road traffic accident that occurred on 09.12.2016. M.F.A. Crob. No. 136/2018 is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation.

2. By the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal allowed the claim petition and directed the Insurance Company to pay compensation in favour of the claimant.

3. I have heard learned Counsel for appellant-Insurance company, learned Counsel for cross-objector-claimant and perused the material on record.

4. In addition to re-iterating the various grounds and contentions urged in the memorandum of appeal and referring to the material on record, learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal committed an error in directing the Insurance Company to pay compensation in favour of the claimant without appreciating the fact that the Driver/Owner of the offending vehicle did not have valid permit and also he possessed only a Learner's licence as on the date of the accident. It is submitted that the Tribunal has not correctly and properly appreciated the material on record resulting in the erroneous impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal which warrants interference by this Court.

5. Per contra, learned Counsel for the claimant-cross objector would support the impugned judgment and award. He further contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is meager and inadequate and the same needs to be enhanced by this Court.

6. The question with regard to the liability of the Insurance Company to pay compensation in favour of the claimant in the first instance by reserving liberty in favour of the Insurance Company to recover the same from the owner by invoking the principle of 'Pay and Recover' if there was breach of terms and conditions of the Insurance Policy including absence of valid and effective Driving Licence is no longer res-integra in the light of the decision of 'New India Assurance Company Limited, Bijapur Vs. Yallavva & Another, (2020 (2) KCCR 1405) : ILR 2020 Kar 2239.

7. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that the Tribunal was justified in allowing the claim petition directing the Insurance Company to pay compensation and liberty is reserved in favour of the Insurance company to recover the same from the Owner of the offending vehicle by invoking the principle of 'Pay and Recover'.

8. Insofar as the quantum of compensation is concerned, the Tribunal has assessed the income of the claimant as Rs. 9,000/- per month. Considering the age of the claimant and his avocation, this Court is of the opinion that the income should be taken as Rs. 10,000/- per month. So also, the Tribunal committed an error in assessing the permanent disability of the claimant to the whole body to an extent of 10%. A perusal of the material on record and an un-impeached evidence of the Doctor would clearly indicate that the permanent disability incurred by the appellant-claimant to the whole body is 20%, it can be quantified at 15%. Hence, taking the notional income as Rs. 10,000/- per month and disability of 15%, the claimant would be entitled to compensation towards loss of future earnings as hereunder:- (Rs. 10,000/- x 12 x 18 x 15/100= Rs. 3,24,000/-.) The Tribunal having awarded compensation of Rs. 1,94,400/-, the appellant would be entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,29,600/- under this head. Consequently, the claimant would be entitled to an additional sum of Rs. 4,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period.

9. Having regard to the nature of the serious and grievous injuries sustained by the claimant, he w