JAYSUKHBHAI BHAGWANJIBHAI BHATT Vs. BHIKHABHAI NANUBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Claimant seeks enhancement in compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal by the impugned award dated 21.11.2008 in MACP No.849 of 1995. Claimant was travelling in ST bus when the bus collided with the truck coming from opposite direction. The United India Insurance Company -opponent No.3 had insured the truck. Claimant filed claim petition seeking compensation of Rs.1,50,000/ -. He was engaged in performance of religious rites ("pooja path"). He claimed that he was earning Rs.5,000/ - per month from such activity. The Tribunal accepted his income at Rs.1,500/ - per month. Both sides agreed 7% disability. The Tribunal held drivers of both the vehicles equally negligent. The Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.31,400/ - as under: -

(2.) From the material on record, it emerges that the claimant in his deposition at Exh.40 had stated that he was engaged in the profession of performing religious rites and 'pooja', earning Rs.5,000/ - per month from such activity. Though there was no serious dispute about his such engagement, the Tribunal, in absence of any further evidence, refused to believe the income of the claimant at Rs.5,000/ - and adopted notional sum of Rs.1,500/ - per month. Even after adjusting for certain exaggerations, income of the claimant could have been taken at Rs.3,000/ - per month. The actual loss of income for three months would therefore come to Rs.9,000/ -. The future loss of income would be Rs.210/ - per month at the rate of 7% or Rs.2,520/ - per annum. He was aged 45 years. Multiplier of 14 as per the decision of the Supreme Court in case of Sarla Varma (Smt.) Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Anr., reported in (2009) 6 SCC, page No.121, would bring the future loss of income at Rs.35,280/ -. He had received fracture and head injury. Pain, shock and suffering of Rs.10,000/ - can therefore be awarded.

(3.) The claimant had produced medical bills of Rs.9,300/ -. No amount was awarded by the Claims Tribunal without any discussion. There is no reason to discard such expenditure supported by medical bills. The claimant would therefore receive total of following amounts: -