Oral Judgment. :

1. The issue involved in this appeal is without disability certificate, the Tribunal has considered 40% disability of the Claimant and while awarding compensation, pension amount is not deducted from income of the Claimant.

2. It is contention of learned counsel for the Appellant that as per the Claimant’s case he has suffered 40% permanent disability due to accidental injury, no disability certificate was produced on record nor doctor has been examined to prove the 40% permanent disability of the Claimant but, the Tribunal has considered 100% functional disability of the Claimant and on that basis compensation is awarded, which is on higher side. Learned counsel further submitted that it has come on record that after the accident the Claimant is getting pension of Rs.9,000/- per month but, this fact is not considered by the Tribunal while calculating monthly income of the Claimant. Hence, requested to allow the appeal. He relied on Raj Kumar vs. Ajay Kumar, (2011) 1 SCC 343.

3. It is contention of learned counsel for the Respondent/Claimant that Claimant was working in the Indian Army as Subhedar and after the accident he was admitted in Military Hospital, Pune. The medical board of military hospital has certified that the Claimant has suffered 40% permanent disability. Due to disability the Claimant has been terminated from the service. He has lost his job. Disability considered by the Tribunal is proper and no interference is required in it. Learned counsel further submitted that pension amount cannot be deducted from the income of the Claimant. As the Claimant had promotional benefits and he had remaining service but due to his early termination due to disability before his retirement, he has suffered huge monitory loss. The judgment and order passed by the Tribunal is legal and valid and no interference is required in it. He relied on Vimal Kanwar and Ors vs. Kishore Dan &

Ors. (2013) 7 SCC 476.

4. I have heard both learned counsel. Perused judgment and order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Solapur (for short “the Tribunal”).

5. To prove his case, the Claimants Jayanand Kamble examined himself at Exhibit-24, he has stated that on 29th August 2010. He was going to Udgir for attending ceremony, he was travelling in jeep, at that time at incident spot one truck bearing registration No. AP-29-TA-5299 came from opposite side in high speed and in rash and negligent manner without observing the traffic rules. The driver of the truck lost his control and came towards wrong side of the road and gave dash to the jeep, in which he was travelling, due to dash he has suffered injuries. He was initially admitted in Latur Critical Centre, at Latur. Thereafter, he was shifted to Solapur for medical treatment in Dhandore Hospital. Thereafter he was shifted to Poona Commando hospital Wanwadi. He has undergone operation and he has spent more than Rs.1,00,000/- for his medical treatment. He further stated that due to pemanent physical disability suffered by accidental injuries, he could not complete his remaining service, he has been terminated from service by the department. His monthly salary was of Rs.35,000/- and 7 years service was remained. In support of his evidence, the Claimant has examined PW-2 Gundu Sonkamble at Exhibit-45 Subhedar in Army. He has stated that he knows the Claimant, he has suffered permanent physical disability due to accidental injuries, as per the Army Rules, Court of enquiry was ordered. This witness was Board member of the same. The Claimant had taken treatment in army hospital and he was assessed for his disability, he had sustained 40% permanent physical disability. In the Court of enquiry, it was found that the Claimant will not do his duty in Punch sector in Jammu and Kashmir. His 7 year service was remained, he was dismissed from service due to his physical disability. This witness further stated that the Claimant could not get two promotions due to his early dismissal from serv