ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)

1. This appeal is filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bharuch in the impugned judgement and award dated 30.04.2013.

2. Brief facts are as under:

The appellant-original claimant was riding his motorcycle on 15.03.2010 going from Bharuch to Surat. At about 10:00 p.m. on the National Highway No. 8 near Kosamba over-bridge, a truck collided with motorcycle causing serious injuries to the claimant. His right leg had been amputated from above knee. He received severe multiple fractures on the left leg. The claimant was running a provision store in Amod. He filed claim petition seeking compensation of Rs. 25 lacs from the driver, owner and insurer of the truck involved in the accident has been filed. Before the Claims Tribunal, the claimant contended that from his business of running a provision store, he was earning monthly Rs. 17,000/-. He had filed income tax returns for the earlier years which he produced on record. He also produced the income tax returns of the later year. The claimant had produced certificate of disability at Exh 28 in which, the Doctor has assessed his permanent disability at 90% of the body as a whole. Before the Tribunal both sides agreed to disability percentage of 80%. The Claims Tribunal however, had not applied this percentage for reduction in the earning capacity of the injured. Instead, the Tribunal compared the income of the injured before the accident as stated in the income tax returns with the income, declared by him in the return field for the period after the accident. The difference between the two was treated as the loss of earning capacity of the injured. Loss of future income was computed on such basis by applying multiplier of 14.

3. This award the claimants have challenged raising following main contentions before us:

(i) The claimant had suffered serious bodily injuries resulting into permanent disability. The Claims Tribunal committed an error in limiting the loss of income by comparing the return income for the period before and after the accident;

(ii) There was no computation for future rise in income;

(iii) Multiplier of 15 instead of 14 should have been granted looking to the age of the injured;

(iv) Compensation of Rs. 1 lac for pain, shock and suffering was also on the lower side.

4. The claimant deposed before the Tribunal at Exh 42 in which, he stated that when he was travelling on his motorcycle, the truck trailer dashed him from behind causing serious injuries which led to amputation of his right leg from above the knee. The conductor of the truck had also expired. He had suffered fracture on the left foot as well as in the hip joint. Plates had to be inserted through operations. He was bedridden for a long time. Besides loss of right leg, his left hip is also defective.

The Doctor had given him disability certificate.

In the cross-examination, he denied that the accident occurred while he was overtaking the truck trailer. He admitted that he still continues the business of selling Pan and Provisions.

5. In disability certificate Exh 28, the Doctor had recorded that the right leg was amputated from mid part of the thigh. He also recorded loss of muscle power on the left foot and the loss of muscle power on the left ankle. In his opinion thus, injuries had left permanent disability of 90%. As noted, this document is accepted on agreement between the two sides that the disability would be assessed at 80% of the body as a whole.

6. The claimant had produced four income tax returns at Exhs 57, 58, 59 and 62 for the assessment years 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 respectively. The return at Exh 57 was filed on 26.08.2008, return at Exh 58 was filed on 11.11.2009 and thus both were filed before the date of the accident. Return at Exh 59 for the assessment year 2010-11 was filed on 28.04.2010 i.e. shortly after the accident. In these three returns, the claimant ha