In cases of permanent disability due to motor accidents, courts must consider proven income, future prospects, and the severity of injuries when determining compensation.

JUDGMENT :

(MAULIK J. SHELAT, J.)

1. The present appeal is filed by the original claimant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act (herein after referred to as ‘the M.V. Act’) challenging judgment and award dated 15.12.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (Aux.-V) Ahmedabad [Rural in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.1258 of 2007.

2. The parties will be referred as per their original position before the Tribunal.

3. Short facts of the case appear to be as under ;

3.1 That on 23.08.2007, the applicant was going to his service/job on his motorcycle no.GJ-1-DE-3829 at about 10:00 O’clock in the morning. At about 10 am when he was passing near Vaibhav Bunglows, one driver of Qualis Car No. GJ-18-T- 8351 came with full speed, in rash and negligent manner and in violation of the traffic rules dashed with the applicant. The applicant was fallen down from the motorcycle. Resultantly, the applicant got serious fracture on his spinal cord and other bodily injuries.

3.2 The claimant submitted that at the time of accident, he was 28 years old and was healthy and strong and having no vices. It is also submitted that at the time of accident, he was doing service in Intrigue Technologies Pvt. Ltd. and earning Rs.18,000/- per month therefrom. It is further submitted that due to the alleged accident, he had sustained grievous injuries and due to which he had to take medical treatment in the SAL Hospital. In due course of treatment, he had expended money towards the special diet, medicines, transportation & attendance charges. Moreover, he had also suffered unbearable pain and mental agony due to the injuries. Due to the accidental injuries, a permanent disability is also caused to him and due to which he is not as capable as he was earlier and further he is also facing troubles while performing his routine works and other works. It is submitted that his monthly income also got affected. Therefore, he has filed the claim petition before the Tribunal to get a compensation of Rs.80,00,000/- from the opponents towards the accidental injuries caused to him.

3.3 The claimant and the insurance company has produced following documentary evidence in support of their case:-

Documents produced by Insurance Company

3.4 The original claimant has been examined at Exhibit 31 and in support of claim, he has examined his employer, namely, Jatinkumar Ashvinkumar at Exhibit 52 and Manish Vinodbhai Mistry, his colleague at Exhibit 62 and Dr.Aditya Indulal Upadhyay at Exhibit 67. On the other hand, the insurance company has not led any evidence to disprove the aforesaid evidence of claimant.

3.5 Respondent nos.1 to 4 were served but did not appear before the Tribunal. The Opponent No.3 - insurance company appeared and filed its written statement at Exhibit 19 thereby, contested the claim petition on all counts.

3.6 After appreciating the evidence on record, the Tribunal has found driver of Qualis car 90% negligent and injured claimant 10% contributory negligent for causing accident as both the vehicles were collided head on. So far as granting compensation is concerned, after appreciating oral and documentary evidence, the Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.23,78,720/-.

3.7 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award, the claimant has preferred the present appeal seeking additiona