JUDGMENT :

Sudeepti Sharma, J. 

1. The present appeal has been preferred against the award dated 05.10.2006 passed in the claim petition filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhiwani (for short, 'the Tribunal') for enhancement of compensation granted to the appellant/claimant to the tune of Rs. 4,07,600/- along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum, on account of injuries sustained by the appellant/claimant in a Motor Vehicular Accident, occurred on 19.07.2003.

2. As sole issue for determination in the present appeal is confined to quantum of compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal, a detailed narration of the facts of the case is not reproduced and is skipped herein for the sake of brevity.

SUBMISSIONS OF LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES

3. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant contends:-

i) That the compensation awarded by the learned Tribunal is on the lower side and deserves to be enhanced.

ii) That the amount awarded towards transportation, special diet, pain and suffering, attendant charges is on lower side. Further contends that no amount has been awarded by the learned Tribunal under the heads of loss of amenities of life. Therefore, the present appeal be allowed and the compensation awarded to the appellant/claimant should be enhanced, as per latest law.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents-Insurance Companies, however, vehemently argue that the award has rightly been passed and the amount of compensation as assessed by the learned Tribunal has rightly been granted. Therefore, they pray for dismissal of the appeal.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the whole record of this case.

6. A perusal of the award further shows that the appellant/claimant has suffered 70% permanent disability as per disability Certificate Ex. P-16. Further perusal of the record reveals that the appellant/claimant was drawing a salary of Rs.7,434/- per month and the same is taken into consideration for calculation of the compensation on account of disability suffered by him. The learned Tribunal has also erred in not awarding the future prospects and also in not applying the multiplier method while calculating the loss of the appellant/claimant. Also the amount awarded towards pain and suffering, attendant charges, transportation, special diet is on the lower side and the same needs to be enhanced.

7. Further perusal of the record shows that the appellant/claimant suffered various grievous injuries on his body making his life miserable. As a result, he had to depend on others for his daily activities and likely employed an attendant to assist him with his physical movements. This Court has dealt with similar issue in case titled as Rani and others v. Harmit Singh alias Kola and others, passed in FAO No 4331-2006, decided on 27.02.2025. The relevant portion of the same is reproduced as under: -

7. xxx xxx xxx

'The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has dealt with the same issue in a judgment passed in FAO-4516-2006 titled as 'Neelam Devi and others Vs. Baljit and others' decided on 04.12.2012. The relevant portion of the same is reproduced as under:-

In view of the above referred to judgment, the appellants/claimants are also entitled to the attendant charges at the rate of Rs. 150/- per day from the date of accident till the date of the death of deceased.

8. Keeping in view the above referred to judgment, the claimant/appellant is entitled for compensation under the head of attendant charges. Therefore, the award requires indulgence of this Court.

SETTLED LAW ON COMPENSATION

9. Hon'ble Supreme Court has settled the law regarding grant of compensation with respect to the disability. The Apex Court in the case of Raj Kumar Vs. Ajay Kumar and Another (2011) 1 Supreme Court Cases 343, has held as under:-

5. The provision of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('Act' for short) makes it clear that the award must be just, which means that compensation should,