The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of recent decisions by the Hon’ble Apex Court to grant just and adequate compensation in motor accident claims cases.

JUDGMENT :

1. Present First Appeal is filed by the original claimant for enhancement of the amount of compensation awarded by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main) Valsad vide order dated 19.8.2006 in M.A.C.P. No.1424 of 2002 whereby, the learned Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition by awarding Rs.2,93,000/- towards compensation in favour of the original claimant.

2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 19.8.2006 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main) Valsad in M.A.C.P. No.1424 of 2002, present appellant has preferred present First Appeal mainly on the ground that while determining the amount of compensation, learned Tribunal has not properly considered the income of the appellant-original claimant.

3. It is also further contented that the learned Tribunal has not properly awarded the just and adequate compensation in favour of the original claimant-appellant herein. The further grounds enumerated in the memo of appeal, the present appeal is filed. The only controversy involved in the present appeal is that the learned tribunal while awarding the compensation has committed an error for determining the income of the appellant-original claimant.

4. The short facts giving rise to the present first appeal are as under:-

4.1 On 17.2.1999 at about 22-15 hours, appellant was going by walk on M.G.Road, Valsad. He was walking on the extreme left side of the road. At that time, the opponent No.1 was coming with Maruti Van Motorcar bearing R.T.O registration No. GJ-15-K-4447 at an excessive speed. That, the opponent No.1 was driving the said motor car rashly, negligently carelessly and against the traffic rules. Due to rash and negligent driving on the part of the opponent No.1 the said Maruti Van Motor car dashed and collided with the body of the appellant which resulted into serious vehicular accident. As a result of vehicular accident, the appellant sustained very serious bodily injuries on right hand elbow, right hand writ, on both the lips, on right side eyelid, on right knee, on his chest and also on his head and other parts of his body. There were fractures of ribs. Because of injuries, the appellant has lost vision permanently in his right eye. Thereafter, he was admitted in Hospital at Valsad as an indoor patient and received medical treatment as an indoor patient from 17.2.1999 to 25.2.1999. He was treated by various doctors etc. but even after the medical treatment the injuries sustained by him have resulted into permanent disablement and therefore, his earning capacity is reduced to the extent of permanent disablement.

4.2 Thereafter, the appellant has filed the claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main), Valsad. The Tribunal after evaluating the evidence on record passed judgment and award and granted compensation of Rs.2,93,000/- to the appellant. The present appeal is preferred by the appellant -original claimant for enhancement of the compensation.

5. Learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in holding that the appellant was earning only Rs.3,000/- p.m. He has further submitted that the learned Tribunal ought to have held that the appellant was earning Rs.6500/- to Rs.7,000/- p.m. He has further submitted that learned Tribunal erred in applying 40% disability to the appellant. He has further submitted that the tribunal failed to appreciate that the work of goldsmith is very delicate and requires vision of both the eyes. The Tribunal therefore, erred in applying 40% permanent disability to the appellant for calculating his future loss of income on the basis of 40% permanent disablement of body as a whole. He has further submitted that the learned Tribunal ought to have applied a higher percentage of disability than 40%. He has further submitted that the learned Tribunal has not co