ANWAR Vs. RAMACHANDRAN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant is the claimant before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded. The major thrust of the argument addressed by the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the notional income taken is too low. It was also contended that the multiplier applied was wrong and the claimant was of thirty years of age. It is also submitted that despite the medical evidence being disability of 10%, the Tribunal took only 7% as disability. The claimant who was a butcher suffered serious injuries and there is a disability to his right leg which detrimentally affects his chosen avocation; is the submission.

(2.) The claimant had asserted an income of Rs. 10,500/- from his avocation as a butcher. The Tribunal fixed it at Rs. 5,000/- per month. The accident occurred in the year 2008. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ramachandrappa v. Manager, Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited [(2011) 13 SCC 236]- found the notional income of a coolie, in the year 2004, to be Rs. 4,500/-. In such circumstance, the appellant who claims to be a butcher can be fixed notional income at Rs. 7,000/- per month, according to this Court.

(3.) The next contention is with respect to the multiplier applied. The multiplier applied is 16 taking the age to be 32. The appellants age is said to be 30 as available in the claim petition. The Insurance Company has also not seriously challenged the age of the claimant. In such circumstance, the multiplier to be applied is 17.