LAWS(GJH)-2023-5-465

RAMSINH DHULSINH ZALA Vs. KAMLESHBHAI DHULABHAI PRAJAPATI

Decided On May 04, 2023
Ramsinh Dhulsinh Zala Appellant
V/S
Kamleshbhai Dhulabhai Prajapati Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Draft amendment is granted. To be carried out forthwith.

(2.) The injured claimant is challenging the judgment and award passed by the learned Tribunal dtd. 11/4/2022 passed in MACP no.679/11 by the MACT (Main), Mehsana. With the consent of both the advocates on record, the matter is taken up for final hearing.

(3.) Mr. Jay Shah along with Mr. Ankit Shah submitted that the learned Tribunal has failed to consider the aspect of prospective rise in income, which has been considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court. Referring to the decision in the case of Pappu Deo Yadav v. Naresh Kumar & Ors , AIR 2020 SC 4424, it is submitted that the learned Tribunal has erred in not considering the addition to the rise in prospective income. It is stated that though 17% disability has been assessed, the learned Tribunal has failed to appreciate that over and above the physical disability, the claimant had suffered neurological permanent disability of 12% and because of that, he is suffering from memory loss and also has speech impediment and thus, stated that amount under the head of pain, shock and suffering has not been appropriately granted. It is further stated that the medical condition of the claimant would require an attendant and the learned Tribunal could have also granted amount under the head of loss of amenities.