The nature of the deceased's job is relevant in determining income for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.

1. Vide award dated 24th July, 2014, the Claims Tribunal has awarded Rs.18,76,950/- to Rohit Kumar. Both the parties have challenged the impugned award. The appellant in MAC APP.797/2014 is seeking reduction whereas the appellant in MAC APP.764/2015 is seeking enhancement of the award amount.

2. On 3rd November, 2012, Rohit Kumar was returning home on foot from Sanya Vihar, Ghaziabad. When Rohit reached the divider on NH-24 in front of Sanya Vihar, a Tata container no.HR-38M-8702 came from Lal Kuan side and ran over his right leg. Rohit was taken to Yashoda Hospital, Ghaziabad where his right leg was amputated. Rohit was working as a Supervisor/Field Officer with Balaji Industries and Services and he claimed to be earning Rs.15,000/- per month.

3. The Claims Tribunal awarded Rs.41,772/- towards expenditure on treatment, Rs.15,000/- towards conveyance and special diet, Rs.17,628/- towards nursing attendant, Rs.1,50,000/- towards pain and sufferings, Rs.1,50,000/- towards loss of amenities and enjoyment of life, Rs.1,50,000/- towards disfiguration and Rs.75,000/- towards loss of marriage prospects. The Claims Tribunal took the functional disability of the injured to be 40% and awarded Rs.11,42,294/- by applying the multiplier of 18 and taking the functional disability as 40%. The total compensation awarded is Rs.18,76,950/-.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant in MAC APP.797/2014 urged at the time of the hearing that the future prospects should not be taken into consideration for computing the loss of earning capacity.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant in MAC APP.764/2015 urged at the time of the hearing that Rs.7 lakh be awarded for artificial limb fixed by M/s. Endolite India Limited by the order of this Court on 15th February, 2017. It is submitted that the Claims Tribunal has awarded only Rs.1 lakh for fixing of artificial limb. Learned counsel seeks enhancement of Rs.6 lakh under the head of fixing of artificial limb. It is further submitted that the Claims Tribunal has taken the loss of earning capacity as 40% whereas the loss of earning capacity is more than 50%.

6. The injured is present in Court and his condition has been seen. Considering the present condition of the injured, the loss of functional disability and earning capacity is increased from 40% to 50%.

7. The Claims Tribunal has taken the income of the deceased as the minimum wages of Rs.8,814/- and added 50% thereon. The appellant was working as a Supervisor/Field Officer at the time of the accident. This Court is of the view that since the occupation of the deceased had been proved as Supervisor/Field Officer, the income of the deceased can be safely presumed to be Rs.13,221/- per month. The law is well settled in this regard. It is not always necessary to resort to minimum wages to assume the income of the deceased. Reference be made to Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Association of Victims of Uphaar Tragedy, AIR 2012 SC 100 in which 59 persons died in Uphaar tragedy in 1997 and the Supreme Court granted compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- to the victims above 20 years of age by taking their income as Rs.8,333/- per month whereas the minimum wages at the relevant time were less than Rs.2600/-. Considering the nature of job of the injured, the income of the deceased is assumed to be Rs.13,221/- and no future prospects are added thereon. Applying the multiplier of 18 and taking the functional disability as 50%, the appellant/injured is entitled to loss of earning capacity of Rs.14,27,868/-. The Claims Tribunal has awarded only Rs.1 lakh for fixing of artificial limb, whereas the cost of artificial limb in this case is Rs.7 lakhs. The cost of artificial limb is enhanced form Rs.1 lakh to Rs.7 lakhs. The compensation awarded under the other heads is just, fair and reasonable and does not warrant any interference. The appellant is entitled to total comp