The extent of compensation for permanent disability under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 is determined by the percentage of disability suffered by the workman.

R.K. Verma, J.

1. This is an appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') filed by the appellant workman against the order dated 19.10.1987 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Indore in Claim Case No. 171 of 1981 whereby the learned Commissioner has awarded to the appellant a sum of Rs. 3,024/- as compensation.

2. The facts giving rise to this appeal, briefly stated, are as follows:

On 19.2.1981, the date of the accident, the appellant was driving the delivery-van No. CPB 644 in the course of his employment as a driver of the said vehicle which was owned by respondent No. 3 and engaged in the work of the firm, respondent No. 1. While the van was coming back from Mahidpur to Indore, after making the delivery of goods at Mahidpur, it turned turtle near Sanwer as the driver tried to save a cyclist from accident. As a result of this accident the appellant's right leg got fractured and the appellant had to undergo medical treatment for a period of four months in M.V. Hospital, Indore, where his right leg was put under plaster twice. Even after recovery, the driver acquired disablement in his right leg rendering him unfit as a driver of motor vehicle. As such, he left the job of driver and is doing the job of chowkidar.

3. The appellant filed a claim petition before the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Indore, against the employer, owner of the vehicle and the insurance company, respondent No. 2 which had insured the owner, respondent No. 3, in respect of the offending vehicle during the relevant period. The respondents resisted the claim of the appellant-claimant.

4. After trial of the case, learned Commissioner found that the claimant was a workman and the respondent No. 3 was the employer and that the personal injury caused to the claimant workman by accident arose out of and in the course of employment Accordingly, the learned Commissioner has held the employer liable to pay compensation but since the employer owner was insured in respect of the vehicle in question the insurance company, respondent No. 2, has been held liable to indemnify the owner in respect of the liability for compensation payable to the claimant.

5. For computing the quantum of compensation the learned Commissioner assessed the monthly income of the appellant driver as Rs. 550/- and the extent of permanent disability acquired because of the injury by accident resulting in fracture of the right leg of the applicant as 10 per cent. Accordingly, the appellant-claimant has been held entitled to a compensation of Rs. 3,024/- on the basis of Schedule IV read with Section 4 of the Act. Being aggrieved by the inadequacy of compensation the appellant-claimant has filed this appeal.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the learned Commissioner has wrongly found that the appellant has only suffered 10 per cent permanent disablement in the said accident. It has been submitted that the appellant has suffered 100 per cent permanent disablement inasmuch as the appellant-claimant has become totally unfit to earn his livelihood as a driver and that is why he had to leave the job of the driver and is working now as a chowkidar. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2, insurance company, has, in reply, submitted that the claimant has himself described the extent of permanent disablement as 15 per cent in his claim petition and as such, the claimant cannot contend in this appeal to have suffered a permanent disablement in excess of 15 per cent.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant-claimant has taken me through the evidence having bearing on the question of disability, as adduced in the case. Dr. Ravikant Jain, who was examined by the claimant as AW 4, has stated that he had medically examined the claimant on 29.8.1985, i.e., more than 4 years after the date of the accident and on such examination he found that the fractured bones of the right ankle of the claimant had jo