A.S. Supehia, J.—Present appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 31.03.2010 passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal (Aux.), Jamnagar, (‘the Tribunal’ for short) in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 232 of 2007 awarding compensation of Rs.3,50,500/- to the appellant from the date of application i.e. 02.04.2007 with 9% interest p.a. till realisation of the compensation amount.

2. Short facts of the case appear to be that on 17.09.2006, in afternoon, the appellant was returning, after taking a bath, from River Lavni. When he was on his way, respondent No. 1 driver of the truck, bearing Reg. No. GJ-18-T-1472 while driving rashly and negligently at Rajkot Jamnagar Road, dashed with the appellant. The appellant received extensive injuries due to the said accident and during the treatment, his left leg was amputated and he suffered multiple fractures in his pelvic area. He filed MACP No. 232/07 before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.20,75,000/-.

3. The Tribunal, after examining the entire record and medical condition of the appellant, awarded compensation of Rs.3,50,500/- with 9% interest as aforesaid. Different heads, under which the Tribunal awarded the amount are stated as below:

Heads Amount

(in Rs.)

Loss of Annual income 13,500=00

Pain, shock and sufferings 1,00,000=00

Special diet, medicines,

attendant, etc. 7,500=00

Future loss of income 2,29,500=00

Total 3,50,500=00

4. Learned advocate for the appellant original claimant has challenged the aforesaid award on the ground that the Tribunal has failed to consider the masonry income of Rs.6,000/- of the appellant and has erred in concluding that the appellant was earning Rs.2,250/- month. He has further contended that the Tribunal has erred in arriving at a conclusion that the appellant has suffered 50% of injury. He has relied upon the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Sarla Varma & Ors. v. Delhi Transport Corporation & Anr., (2009) 6 S.C.C. 121.

5. Mr. Anal Shah, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.3 Insurance Company, has supported the award passed by the Tribunal.

6. We have perused the award passed by the Tribunal. We have also considered the medical evidence. At this stage it would be appropriate to refer to the deposition given by Medical practitioner, Khimjibhai Hirabhai Sojitra (Exh.29). In his deposition he has stated that the appellant had suffered grievous injuries on his left leg and at the pelvic area and due to the said injuries left leg of the appellant was amputated. A medical certificate with respect to 50% permanent disability was also issued. It was the case of the appellant original claimant before the Tribunal that one of his testicles was also removed due to the injuries in his pelvic area.

7. A comparison chart for quantum of compensation is produced by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 3 Insurance Company, which is reproduced as under:

Compensation As per Relevant page As per subm- Relevant

Award under of award ission of Resp- page of cited

Challenge Ins. Co. judgment

(A) Future Loss of

Income

1. Monthly Income Rs. 2,250/- p.m Para 13 Page 10 Rs. 3,000/- p.m.,

2. Prospective -NIL- Not considered Rs. 900/- p.m, Judgment of Guj.

Income HC (DB) in FA/

648/09 (Para.7)

In absence of

evidence of

income 30%

prospective rise.

3. Disability/ 50% Para 15 Page 11 50.00% (2011) 12 SCC

Functional loss 488 Kumaresh

of body as a whole v. National Ins.

(Para 10, 11)

4. Annual loss of Rs. 1,125 (50% of 2250)x L 1,950 (50%

income 12 = Rs. 13,500, of 3900) x 12 =

Para 14 Page 20 Rs.23,400/-,

5. Multiplier 17 Para 12 Page 18 17 Sarla Varma v.

Delhi Transport

(2009) 6 SCC 121

Total future Loss Rs. 2,29,500/- Para 22 Page 18 Rs. 3,97,800/-,

of income

(B) Actual loss of Rs. 13,500/- Para 22 Page 18 Rs. 18000/- (Rs. 3,000 x 6)

income (6 months)

(C) Pain, Shock & Rs. 1,00,000/- Para 19 Page 16 Rs. 1,00,000/-,