JUDGMENT

Joseph J.

The appellant is the claimant in the case filed under Section 166 (1) (a) of the Motor Vehicles Act. This appeal is filed by the claimant aggrieved by quantum of compensation awarded. The accident occurred in 10.5.2001.

2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant, Adv. Smt. M U Vijayalakshmi and the Senior Counsel for the Insurance Company, Adv. Sri. Mathews Jacob.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant pointed out that that the income fixed by the Tribunal is inadequate. She also points out that the appellant is entitled to income based on Ext.A 14 Series which are Income Tax return (Saral).

4. Tax return relates to the period 1999-2000.

Therein the income was shown as Rs.63,702/- . Ext. A15 is a copy of the income tax return for the assessment year 2001- 02, in which the income from his business is Rs.40,615/- The Tribunal has taken his income as Rs.4,000/- on the basis of average income. Having regard to the materials available, we cannot say that the income taken at 4,000/- per month in the year 2001 is un reasonable. We reject the said contention.

5. It is contended that in Ext. A9 certificate, the percentage of his disability as 22%. The certificate shows