Functional disability must be assessed based on the actual impact on earning capacity rather than a mechanical adoption of physical disability percentages. Furthermore, compensation must be just, necessitating realistic enhancements for attendant charges, medical requirements, and loss of life's amenities in cases of severe permanent disability.

JUDGMENT

==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No

==========================================================

1. The captioned appeal is filed against the impugned judgment and award dated 19.02.2014 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Auxiliary), City Civil Court, Ahmedabad in MACP No.1019/2001, whereby the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.4,99,200/- as a compensation along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization.

2. The succinct facts leading to file the captioned appeal are that on 06.04.2000 at about 8:00 p.m., the claimant-Janeshvarsinh Vishvanathsinh Sharma was proceeding from Mansa to Chandkheda by driving his jeep bearing registration no.MP-23-L-5934 at very moderate speed with due care and caution. When he reached near the place of accident, the respondent no.1 herein came by driving a tempo bearing registration no.GJ-1-X-4814 in rash and negligent manner, at an excessive speed, from the wrong side of the road and dashed with the said jeep and resultantly, the said jeep turned turtle. Due to the impact of the said accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries on various parts of his body. He was initially taken to Rajasthan Hospital and thereafter he was shifted to Ram Ratan Hospital, Bihar. The FIR came to be lodged against the respondent no.1/driver of the tempo. It is also the case of the claimant/appellant that at the time of accident, he was working as a driver with M/s. Shivani Oil Company and thereby he was earning a sum of Rs.3,000/- per month. Therefore, the claim petition for seeking the compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- came to be filed.

3. On being served, the respondent/insurance company filed its written statement at Exh.19, thereby denying all the averments made in the claim petition and prayed for rejection of the claim petition.

4. Having considered the pleadings, evidence led by respective parties and the submissions canvassed by the respective parties, the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.4,99,200/- as a compensation along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of claim petition till its realization.

5. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award, the original claimant/appellant herein challenged the impugned judgment and award on the ground of quantum.

6. Heard learned counsels for the parties.

7. Mr. R.K. Mansuri, learned counsel appearing on behalf of original claimant/appellant herein vehemently submitted that at the time of accident, the claimant/appellant was working as a driver with M/s. Shivani Oil Company and thereby he was earning a sum of Rs.5,250/- per month. He further submitted that he has placed the certificate issued by the said company on record and also filed the attendance sheet on record; however, the learned Tribunal, ignoring all these documentary evidence on record, determined the income of the claimant/appellant as Rs.3,000/- per month, which is lower than the income proved on record. He further submitted that at the time of accident, the claimant/appellant was aged about 32 years, therefore, the learned Tribunal ought to have added 40% of the monthly income on account of future prospects of the claimant