Point of Law: It is a matter of record that Tribunal considered permanent disability of the body as a whole to extent of 90% and assessed compensation under head of loss of future income

JUDGMENT :

R.M. Chhaya, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and award dated 30.12.2017 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gandhidham at Kutch in MACP no.317 of 2013, the appellant-original claimant has preferred this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

2. Following facts emerge from the record of the appeal:-

That the accident took place on 25.6.2013. It is the case of the appellant-original claimant that on the date of the accident, he was sitting as a pillion rider on a motorcycle bearing registration no. GJ-12 BJ-7529 which was being driven by the deceased-Buddhubhai Hajabhai Jat. It is the case of the appellant that when they reached near the place of the accident, at that time, the original respondent no.1 came by driving his tanker bearing registration no. GJ-12 G-1189 in a rash and negligent manner and dashed with the motorcycle because of which the claimant fell down. It is the case of the appellant that because of the impact of the accident, the appellant sustained serious injuries, which has resulted into permanent disability to the tune of 90%. Record indicates that FIR came to be lodged with the jurisdictional Police Station. The appellant-original claimant filed the present claim petition under Section 166 of the Act and claimed compensation of Rs.25,00,000/-. It was the case of the appellant that the accident occurred because of the sole negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle i.e. the tanker. It was the case of the appellant that he was earning Rs.10,000/- per month. The appellant was examined at Exh.36. The appellant also relied upon the documentary evidences, such as, copy of FIR at Exh.38, copy of the Panchnama of the place of accident at Exh.39, copy of insurance policy of tanker bearing registration no.GJ-12 G-1189 at Exh.42, copy of MLC certificate at Exh.43, copy of discharge card issued by Rajasthan Hospital, Ahmedabad at Exh.44, copy of discharge summary by Nanavati Hospital at Exh.45, copy of the disability certificate issued by the Chief Medical Officer-cum-Civil Surgeon, Bhuj at Exh.46 and 47, copy of village form no.8-A at Exh.48, copy of the medical bills at Exh.49, copy of charge-sheet at Exh.51 and copy of the driving license at Exh.52.

3. The Tribunal after appreciating the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the appellant has not adduced any evidence to prove his income and by a guesswork, determined the income of the appellant at Rs.2,500/- per month. Applying the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sarla Verma Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 SCC 121, the Tribunal applied multiplier of 14. It is a matter of record that the Tribunal considered permanent disability of the body as a whole to the extent of 90% and assessed the compensation under the head of loss of future income at Rs.3,78,000/-. The Tribunal considered the documentary evidence Exh.49 and awarded a sum of Rs.1,03,365/- towards medical expenses. Over and above the same, the Tribunal awarded Rs.10,000/- under the head of pain, shock and suffering, Rs.5,000/- as compensation under the head of special diet, transportation and attendant charges and Rs.15,000/- towards loss of income and thus, awarded total compensation of Rs.5,11,365/- along with 9% interest per annum with proportionate costs and interest. The Tribunal was pleased to partly allow the claim petition and awarded Rs.5,11,365/- with proportionate cost and interest at the rate of 9% per annum. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant has preferred this appeal.

4. Heard Mr. Hiren Modi, learned advocate for the appellant, Mr. Shrijit Pillai, learned advocate for respondent no.1 and Mr. Vibhuti Nanavati, learned advocate for the respondent no.3 – insurance Company. Though served, no one appears for the other respondent. We ha