JUDGMENT

1. Captioned appeal is filed against the impugned judgment and award dated 03.03.2014 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), 2nd Additional District Judge, Kheda at Nadiad in Motor Accident Claim Petition No.61 of 2009, whereby the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs.1,68,800/- as a compensation along with the interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization.

2. The succinct facts leading to file the captioned appeal are that on 11.12.2008, claimant- Sandipbhai Santubhai Patel was travelling in Travera car bearing registration No.GJ-7-AG-5202 and coming back from Anand to Nadiad. When they reached at place of accident, the opponent No.1 came by driving the truck bearing registration No.GJ-6-U-7833 and applied the sudden brake, resultantly the four wheels came out of the axle and one of the wheels dashed with the car of the claimant, consequently, the driver of the said Travera car lost control over the steering. Due to the impact of the accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries.

2.1. Having been served with the notice of claim petition, the opponent No.3-Insurance Company appeared and filed Written Statement vide Exhibit-20, thereby denying the contents of the claim petition and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition. The opponent No.1 & 2 appeared before the learned Tribunal but not filed any Written Statement.

2.2. Having considered the pleadings of the parties, the learned Tribunal framed the following issues, for determination.

“1. Whether the claimant proves that he had sustained injuries because of rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver, opponent No.1 of the vehicle involved in the accident?

2. Whether the claimant is entitled to get compensation? If so? Then what amount and from Whom?

3. What order and award?”

2.3. Having considered the pleadings of the parties, oral as well as documentary evidence adduced on record and the submissions canvassed by learned advocates for the parties, the learned Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs.1,68,800/- as a compensation along with the interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization.

2.4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and award, the appellant-herein preferred the captioned appeal on the ground of quantum.

3. Heard learned advocates for the parties.

4. Mr. Hiren M. Modi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the original claimant/appellant, vehemently submitted that at the time of accident, the claimant/appellant was aged about 40 years and he was gainfully engaged in the business of transportation as well as agricultural work and thereby earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month. However, the learned Tribunal had ignored all the evidence on record and considered the monthly income of the claimant/appellant at Rs.4,000/- which is at a lower side. He further submitted that considering the evidence on record, the learned Tribunal ought to have assessed the income of the claimant/appellant at Rs.15,000/- per month. He further submitted that at the time of accident, the claimant/appellant was aged about 40 years, therefore, the learned Tribunal ought to have added 25% of the monthly income on account of future prospects of the claimant/appellant. He further submitted that the claimant sustained permanent partial disability of 34% in relation to left upper limb. However, the learned advocates for the parties agreed to reduce the said disability to 14% by way of filing the pursis at Exhibit-53. He further submitted that considering the reasonable income and thereafter adding 25% on account of future prospects, the compensation awarded under the head of future loss of income is required to be enhanced.

4.1. Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the claimant sustained grievous fracture injuries and for