JUDGMENT :

Heard Ms. P. Baruah, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. K.K. Bhatta, learned counsel for respondent No.1.

2. This appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 is for enhancement of the Award amount dated 20.06.2015 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Golaghat in MAC Case No.97/2011.

3. The learned Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.70,164/- with interest @ 7% per annum from the date of filing the claim petition till the realization of the entire amount for the injuries sustained to the claimant on 20.06.2015. Being aggrieved with the awarded amount, the appellant has come with the present appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation.

4. Facts of the case in a nutshell is that on 12.03.2010 at about 9:00 a.m., while the appellant was driving his Motor Cycle bearing registration No.MN-01-W-3976 from Golaghat side towards Rangajan side, he met with an accident with the vehicle bearing registration No. MN-01-W-3976 (Scorpio). As a result of the accident the Motor Cycle was badly damaged and the appellant sustained compound fracture of both bone (Tibia and Fibula) in his right leg.

5. The claimant was first taken to KK Civil Hospital, Golaghat, where he was given first aid treatment and was referred to another Hospital due to his serious injuries and he was thereafter admitted at Golaghat Nursing Home. The claim of the appellant was that since he could not recover from the injuries, as per the advised of the doctor, Dr. R.N. Singh, he had to go to Patna on 4 (four) occasions for medical treatment and he had become a permanently disabled person. He submitted a report /certificate wherein disability was certified as 50%.

6. The learned Tribunal after taking evidence from both the parties and on hearing both the parties framed the following issues :

(i) Whether the claimant sustained grievious injuries in a motor vehicle accident which took place on 12.03.11 at about 9 am at Ranjan Tiniali under Golaghat PS caused by the driver of vehicle No.MN-01-W-3976 (Scorpio) due to its rash and negligent driving?

(ii) Whether the claimant is entitled to get compensation? If so, what is the quantum, and from whom?

After analysing the evidence and the medical report submitted, issue No.1 was decided in favour of the claimant. With regards to issue No.2, the learned Tribunal by citing the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar reported in 2011 (1) TAC 785 (SC) held that the claimant will be entitled to compensation under the following heads

Pecuniary Damages :

(i) Expenses relating to treatment, hospitalization, medicine, transportation, nourishing food and miscellaneous expenses;

(ii) Loss of earning which the injured would have made had he not been injured, comprising –

(a) Loss of earning during the period of treatment.;

(b) Loss of future earning on account of permanent disability.

(iii) Future medical expenses;

Non pecuniary damages :

(iv) Damages for pain, sufferings, trauma as a consequences of injury;

(v) Loss of amenities (and/or) loss of prospect of marriage;

(vi) Loss of expectation of life (shortening of normal longevity)

The learned tribunal held that from cash memos bills and voucher submitted the appellant was entitled to the amount of Rs.39,166/- which is the actual expenditure incurred by the claimant under head No.(i).

7. The learned Tribunal also held that the appellant was working as a teacher and drawing a monthly salary of Rs.17,000/- p.m. There was no evidence that during the period of treatment he suffered any loss of income, that he being a government servant and since he was still working, there was also no question of loss of income in future. The learned Tribunal also held that there is no medical evidence to show that he will incur medical expenses in the future and as thus is not entitled to such compensation under head no. (ii)(a) & (b) and (iii). And having regard to his age and the period of treatment and the nature and gravity of the injuries sustai