Compensation for permanent disability must adequately reflect the injured party's needs, including full income consideration and costs for necessary assistance.

ORDER

1. Instant appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and award dated 25.05.2017 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kotputali, District Jaipur in Motor Accident Claims Case No.297/2014 by which an award of Rs.9,16,875/- has been passed.

2. Counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant has suffered 90% permanent disability and he is not able to discharge his daily routine activities. He submits that as per the disability certificate Ex.P27 of the appellant he has suffered 90% permanent disability and the disability certificate indicates that he requires one attendant for his daily routine activities for rest of his life. He further submits that while determining the compensation the learned Tribunal has accessed his income on the basis of the minimum wages prevailing at the relevant time i.e. Rs. 189 per day. He further submits that while accessing the income total 26 days in a month has been taken into consideration while passing the award. He further submits that as per the view taken by this Court in the case of Jalaur Singh @ Dilawar Singh Vs. Barkat reported in 2012(2) MACD Rajasthan 692, the Tribunal ought to have considered the income of the injured for 30 days instead of 26 days. He further submits that while passing the impugned award the Tribunal has not granted any amount of compensation towards the loss of amenities of life and not a single penny has been awarded for the attendant who is regularly attending the injured. He further submits that another facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned award needs suitable enhancement.

3. Per contra, counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 opposed the appeal. Admittedly, the appellant has filed the claim under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation on account the injuries sustained by him in Motor Vehicle Accident occurred in the night on 25.03.2014. Their perusal of the disability certificate available on the record marked as Ex.P27 clearly indicates that the appellant has sustained 90% disability and as per the note indicated in the disability certificate, the appellant requires one attendant for his entire life for discharging his routine activities. Disability certificate has been issued by the Medical Board of three doctors of Community Health Centre, Sanganer, Jaipur and there is no reason to disbelieve the genuines of the certificate. The perusal of the said certificate clearly indicates that the appellant is not in a position to perform his daily routine activities and for that purpose he needs help of a attendant for discharging the routine activities.

4. At the time of the accident the age of the appellant was 50 years. Looking to his age the Tribunal has applied multiplier of 13.

5. Heard both the counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record.

6. As per the view taken by this Court in the case of Jalaur Singh Vs. Barkat (supra), the Tribunal should have considered the income/minimum wages of the appellant for 30 days instead of 26 days. So, herein in the instant case also the same analogy is applicable and the appellant is entitled to get minimum wages for 30 days. Counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on a judgment passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court while deciding in SBCMA No.1948/2009 wherein the situation was almost identical and keeping the age of the appellant therein and looking to the disability suffered by him it was held by the Court that he was entitled to get a sum of Rs.3 lakh towards loss of amenities in life and he was held to be entitled to get a sum of Rs.2 lakh on account of requirement of attendant. Thus, in the facts and circumstances of the case, appellant is entitled to receive Rs.189 X 4 X 12 X 13 X 90% = Rs.1,06,142/- + Rs.3,00,000/- + Rs.2,00,000/- = Rs.6,06,142/-.

7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The amount award dated 25.05.2017 stands modified to the extent that the appellant would be entitled to receive Rs.6,06,142/- by way of compensation in addition to