JUDGMENT :

R.Subbiah, J.

The appeal is heard through video conferencing.

2. Challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Special Sub Judge No.II, Salem, in MCOP.No.1873 of 2016 dated 07.02.2018, the present appeal has been filed by the Insurance Company.

3. It is the case of the first respondent/claimant that he was working as an additional driver in a Taurus Lorry bearing Registration No. KA 01 B 8114 and earning a sum of Rs.25,000/- per month. On 26.12.2015, while the said Taurus Lorry was proceeding near a Polytechnic College in Hunagunda Hukal NH 50 Main Road, the Driver of the said Taurus Lorry drove the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against a Trailer Lorry bearing Registration No.KA 48/3422, which was parked on the left side of the road. Due to the impact, the first respondent/claimant, who travelled as a second driver, sustained multiple grievous injuries on his left leg and other vital organs of the body. Immediately, the injured was admitted in the Government Hospital, Hunagunda, Karnataka and thereafter, he was shifted to Ganga Hospital, Coimbatore, where he took treatment for more than 40 days. As his left leg was crushed severely, it was amputated below the knee. Hence, the claimant made a claim for a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- as compensation.

4. Resisting the claim made by the first respondent/claimant, the appellant/Insurance Company filed a counter statement, inter alia, contending that the accident had not occurred in the manner as projected by the first respondent/claimant. They have also denied the age, occupation and income of the first respondent/claimant.

5. To prove the claim, before the Tribunal, first respondent/claimant examined himself as PW1 and marked 12 documents, viz., Exs.P1 to P12. On the side of the Insurance Company, none was examined and no exhibit was marked.

6. On an appreciation of the materials and the entire evidence on record, the Tribunal arrived at a finding that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the Taurus Lorry bearing Registration No.KA 01 B 8114 and hence, its insurer, the appellant is liable to pay the compensation. Further, the Tribunal held that the first respondent/claimant is entitled to get a compensation of Rs.22,84,756/- from the appellant/Insurance Company. The break-up details of the amounts awarded by the Tribunal under various heads are as follows:

7. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant/Insurance Company submitted that though they have raised defence regarding liability, now they are not pressing the same. The reason being, there is coverage for the risk that may be incurred by the additional driver in the vehicle with payment of additional premium of Rs.50/- by the owner of the vehicle.

8. Now, the main contention of the learned counsel for the appellant/Insurance Company is that, though the Doctor had examined the claimant and fixed the permanent disability at 65%, the Tribunal without assigning any valid reason, had taken the permanent disability of the claimant at 100%. Hence, the permanent disability of the claimant has to be fixed at 65% and the “Future Loss of Income” of the claimant has to be re-calculated accordingly. He further submitted that the amounts awarded by the Tribunal under the other heads are very high, which resulted in awarding exorbitant sum of Rs.22,84,756/- as co