JUDGMENT :

NIRAL R. MEHTA

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and award dated 13.3.2006 passed in Motor Accident Claims Petition No.15 of 2000 by learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux.), Fast Track Court, Anjar – Kutch, the appellant – original claimant has preferred the present appeal under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act (“the Act” for short).

2. The original claim of the claimant was for Rs.3,00,000/-. However, learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,15,250/- with 9% interest under the various heads as under.

3. It is the case of the claimant that on 18.9.1999 while he was walking on the street, the scooter bearing registration No.GJ 12 R 7413 came on the wrong side and dashed with the claimant. As a result thereof, the claimant sustained serious injuries on various parts of his body, such as on chest, hands, stomach and right leg. The claimant was, therefore, admitted as indoor patient in the hospital of Dr.Hemant Patel for a period between 18.9.1999 and 23.9.1999. Thus, the claimant has approached the learned Tribunal by way of an application under section 166 of the Act seeking, inter alia, compensation for the injuries so received arising from the motor vehicular accident.

4. Learned Tribunal, after having considered the evidence on record, held the driver of the offending scooter as sole responsible for the accident in question. Learned Tribunal, thereafter, proceeded to award compensation by considering the income of the claimant at Rs.1500/- per month. Learned Tribunal, thereafter, considering injury certificate assessed permanent disability body as a whole to the extent of 25%. Learned Tribunal, having considered the age of the claimant at 52 years, adopted multiplier of 11. Accordingly, learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.74,250/- under the head of loss of future income.

Learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.7500/- under the head of pain, shock and suffering. Learned Tribunal awarded Rs.25,000/- under the head of medical expenses, Rs.2000/- under the head of attendant charges, Rs.1000/- under the head of transportation charges, Rs.1000/- under the head of special diet and Rs.4500/- under the head of actual loss of income. Thus, in all, learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,15,250/- by way of compensation with 9% interest from the date of application till realization.

5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the aforesaid, the appellant has approached this Court by way of this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

6. I have heard learned advocate Mr.Samee Uraizee, learned advocate for Mr.Mehul Shah, learned advocate for the appellant and Ms.Reshma Rauma, learned advocate for Mr.Vasant Shah, learned advocate for the insurance company.

7. Learned advocate Mr.Uraizee for the appellant submits that the award passed by learned Tribunal is on lower side and cannot be said to be just and adequate in nature. Learned advocate Mr.Uraizee submitted that learned Tribunal has committed serious error in considering notional income of the claimant at Rs.1500/- in absence of any evidence of income. Learned advocate Mr.Uraizee submitted that learned Tribunal ought to have taken into consideration the daily wages prevalent at the time of accident so as to arrive to a conclusion with regard to monthly income. Accordingly, Mr.Uraizee, learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that notional income of the appellant ought to have been considered at Rs.2000/- per month.

8. Learned advocate Mr.Uraizee further submitted that while computing income, prospective rise in income also to be considered. To substantiat