AMAR Vs. SAVITA RAVINDRA POTADAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal coming on for admission is considered for final disposal as the issue involved falls under a narrow compass, namely, whether the income of the appellant could have been adopted at Rs. 4,000/ - per month, when he was a driver holding a licence to drive a heavy goods vehicle.

(2.) IT is the case of the appellant that he is no longer able to continue with his avocation, as the injuries are of such a nature that he is permanently disabled and he is unable to drive any more. The Tribunal having taken the income at Rs. 4,000/ - per month, the compensation awarded has been drastically reduced and it is in that regard that the present appeal is filed.

(3.) THE learned counsel for respondent No. 2 however would vehemently resist the appeal and would submit that the accident was of the year 2007 and even if the appellant is permanently disabled, the contention that there is 100% loss of earning capacity cannot be readily accepted as there are other avocations in which the appellant can gainfully engage himself and therefore the contention that the earning capacity is lost by 100% and the contention that the monthly income of the appellant ought to have been taken at a rate higher than Rs. 4,000/ - is also not tenable. It is contended that the income taken is generous and does not require any enhancement.