The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of principles for determining compensation in motor accident claims, as outlined by the Supreme Court, including considerations for pain, suffering, loss of income, and future prospects.

JUDGMENT :

HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award dated 24.01.2008 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main) Gandhinagar in Motor Accident Claims Petition No. 20 of 2006, whereby the Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition and awarded Rs.2,60,000/- towards compensation to the original complainant

2. The short facts giving rise to present appeal reads as under:

2.1 On 17.11.2005 at about 6.00 a.m. an accident was taken place. The deceased Naranbhai Somnathbhai Valand along with other persons were going from Gandhinagar to Virpur as a pedestrian in the 9th Procession which was organized by Shri Lohana Yuva Sangathan, Gandhinagar, when they were passing near Vachhraj Tea Stall on Naklang-Gondal National Highway Road, they were walking on the side of the road carefully. At that time, one luxury bus bearing registration No. GJ.4V-1130 came with full speed, rashly and negligently on the wrong side of the road and dashed with Naranbhai Somnathbhai Valand. As a result of which, accident took place and Naranbhai has received grievous injuries on various parts of his body and due to injury, he died during the treatment hours.

2.2 Due to the said accident, since present appellant was also pedestrian with the said deceased and other persons, he was also sustained fracture on the right hand with grievous injuries over head and other parts of the body. Hence, above mentioned claim petition is filed by the present appellant.

2.3 The learned Tribunal has considered the oral and the documentary evidence and after considering the arguments of all the concerned parties, partly allowed the claim petition and passed the order and awarded Rs.2,60,000/- towards the compensation. Therefore, the claimant has filed present appeal for enhancement of the compensation.

3. Mr. Modi, learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that present appeal is filed on the ground that learned Tribunal has committed serious error while considering the income of the present appellant, at the time of determining the amount of compensation. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal has not awarded just and adequate compensation. It is further submitted that the learned Tribunal has not properly awarded the amount under head of pain, shock and suffering, though appellant has undergone five operations after having injury on the head. Therefore, the amount ought to have been awarded on higher side under the head of pain, shock and suffering and instead that learned Tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/- towards pain, shock and suffering and therefore, the impugned judgment and award deserves to be modified.

4. On the other hand, Mr. Mehta, learned advocate appearing for the insurance company has submitted that there was no cogent material or evidence produced by the appellant on record with regard to the future prospective rise or any loss towards the future prospective rise, as he was serving as a Statistics Assistant in Gujarat State Agricultural Marketing Board, Gandhinagar and he was continuously served as on the same post till his superannuation and therefore there was no loss in future prospective rise in his salary. Therefore, learned Tribunal has not committed any error while passing the impugned judgment and award. It is also further contended by learned Counsel Mr. Mehta, for the respondent insurance company that the learned Tribunal has rightly considered the disablement in its true and proper spirit and therefore, there is no interference is required to be called for. It is also contended that the learned Tribunal has rightly awarded the amount under the head of pain, shock and suffering, as there was no sufficient material produced by the appellant before the learned Tribunal, therefore, learned Tribunal has rightly passed the impugned judgment and award. It is also further con