JUDGMENT :

1. The captioned appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and award dated 27.09.2011 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Main) at Patan in M.A.C.P. No. 265 of 2004, whereby the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the Claim Petition and awarded a sum of Rs.1,48,000/-, along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization, as compensation.

2. The succinct facts, which led to the filing of the captioned appeal, as narrated in the Claim Petition are summarized as under:-

i. On 21.07.2004 at about 07:30 p.m., the Original Claimant/appellant herein – Mr. Jitabhai Ajmalbhai Pajapati, was walking on the correct side of the road, near the sign board of his village. When he reached near the place of the accident, one jeep bearing registration No.GJ-2A-4326, came from the wrong side at very rash and negligent manner and at an excessive speed, and dashed with the original claimant/appellant herein, thereby causing the vehicular accident. As a result of the said vehicular accident, the original claimant/appellant herein sustained serious fractures and several other bodily injuries.

ii. It is the case of the original claimant/appellant herein before the learned Tribunal that at the time of the vehicular accident, he was aged about 44 years and was working as a labourer, thereby earning Rs.4,500/- per month. It is also the case of the original claimant/appellant herein before the learned Tribunal that he had sustained grievous injuries in the vehicular accident and had undergone medical treatment for a considerable period of time. Therefore, Claim Petition was preferred before the learned Tribunal seeking compensation to the tune of Rs.3,00,000/-.

iii. Having been served with the notices/summons of the Claim Petition, respondent No.3 – Insurance Company filed its Written Statement, thereby denying the averments made in the Claim Petition, and in brief, prayed for dismissal of the Claim Petition.

iv. Having considered the pleadings, evidence on record and the submissions advanced by the learned counsels for the respective parties, the learned Tribunal had partly allowed the Claim Petition, and awarded a sum of Rs.1,48,000/-, along with interest at the rate of 7.5% per annum, from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization, as compensation.

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

3. Heard learned counsels for the parties.

4. Mr. Thakkar, learned counsel for the original claimant/appellant herein vehemently submitted that at the time of the vehicular accident, the claimant was working as a labourer. The income of the claimant could not be proved on record by leading any cogent evidence, however, the learned Tribunal had assessed the income of the claimant at Rs.3,000/- per month, which is at a very lower side. He further submitted that the claimant was aged about 44 years at the time of the vehicular accident, however, the learned Tribunal had not considered the future prospective income of the claimant. He further submitted that 25% of the monthly income of the claimant is required to added on account of the future prospects of the claimant. He further submitted that the learned Tribunal ought to have applied the multiplier of “14” instead of “11” as per the age of the claimant.

5. Learned counsel for the claimant further submitted that in the vehicular accident, the claimant has sustained multiple fractures such as close communited fracture femur extending from neck to shaft femur (rt) side, communited fracture humerus (rt) side, fracture clavicle (rt) side and head injury. The Disability Certificate has been proved at Exh.26, whereby Dr. Mahesh Khandelwal has certified that the claimant has sustained permanent disability of 32% body as a whole, however, the learned Tribunal, without any