JUDGMENT :

This is an appeal of the claimant against the award and judgment passed by the MACT, Gokak in MVC No.2500/2016 dated 12.12.2017 seeking enhancement of compensation.

2. We refer the parties as per their ranks before the trial Court.

3. The case of the petitioner before the Trial Court was that, on 01.06.2016, at about p.m. he was returning from Gokak to his village Chikkanandi on Gokak-Yaragatti road on his motorcycle bearing No.KA47/E1361, he met with accident at Savalyal Pol due to rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle bearing No.KA49/S6995 by its rider, due to which petitioner had sustained fracture of left tibia and fibula. He was admitted to hospital of Dr.M.G.Umbrani at Gokak. He underwent surgery and his left leg below the knee joint was amputated. Petitioner had further contended that at the time of accident, he was aged 45 years; he was an agriculturist and also doing agricultural coolie work, he was earning Rs.2,00,000/-per annum from agriculture and Rs.12,000/- per month by working as an agricultural coolie. He has further stated that he has spent Rs.1,50,000/- towards medical expenses and he requires Rs.5,00,000/-for his future medical expenses. Due to amputation to left leg, he became permanently disabled and unable to do any work. With these reasons, he prayed to award compensation of Rs.30,00,000/-.

4. Respondent No.1 is the owner of the motorcycle bearing No.KA49/S6995. In his written statement, he has admitted the claim of the petitioner and he has further stated that the said vehicle was insured with respondent No.2 and policy of the insurance was in force as on the date of accident and therefore, respondent No.2 is liable to pay the compensation.

5. Respondent No.2 in it’s written statement denied all the petition averments and has stated that its liability is restricted to terms and conditions of policy of insurance and holding of valid and effective driving license by the rider of the motorcycle and prayed for dismissal.

6. From the above pleadings, the trial Court has framed the following issues:

1. Whether the petitioner proves that he has sustained injuries in the road traffic accident that took place on 01.06.2016 at about p.m. on Gokak-Yaragatti road near Savalyal Pol at Dundanatti, due to rash and negligent riding of motorcycle bearing No.KA49/S6995 by its rider who dashed to the petitioners motorcycle bearing No.KA47/E1361 when petitioner was riding the motor cycle as averred in the petition?

2. Whether petition is bad for non-joinder of necessary parties?

3. Whether Petitioner is entitled for compensation? If so, what is quantum and from whom?

4. What order or award?

7. The petitioner has examined PW.1 and PW.2 and got marked Ex.P.to P22. Respondent No.2 has examined RW1 and got marked Ex.R1 to R3.

8. Learned trial judge appreciating pleadings and evidence on record, awarded compensation of Rs.6,84,000/-by the impugned judgment dated 12.12.2017.

9. We have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

10. The following point emerges for our determination:

1. Whether petitioner is entitled for enhancement of compensation awarded by the trial Court?

11. Learned advocate for appellant has contended that Trial Court has taken the income of petitioner as Rs.7,000/-per month which is on much lower side. The trial Court has not properly appreciated percentage of permanent disability of petitioner. Petitioner’s left leg below the knee joint was amputated. He was an agriculturist. Therefore, he has been suffering from permanent disability to an extent of 100%. However, the trial court wrongly considered it as 50%. The amount of compensation awarded by the trial Court on other heads are also very meager and hence, prayed for enhancement.

12. Learned advocate for respondent supported the findings of the trial Court.

13. The learned Trial Judge after appreciating the plead