POPAT ADINATH TIKATE Vs. SUDAM VITHOBA SARDOE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Advocates for the parties. The Appellant who is the original claimant in the claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 has taken an exception to the Judgment and Award dated 5th December 1996.

(2.) The accident occurred on 11th April 1989 at about 3.15 a.m.at village Saradwadi on Pune-Ahmednagar road. A tempo and a truck were involved in the accident. The Appellant was travelling by the tempo. According to the Appellant, he sustained several injuries in the accident including loss of second,third and fourth toe and fracture of left shaft femur. After the contest, the tribunal held that the driver of the truck was negligent and therefore, the owner and the insurer of the truck have been held jointly and severally liable to pay compensation. The tribunal has fixed the compensation of Rs.43,200/- with interest at the rate of 12% p.a.

(3.) The submission of the learned Advocate for the Appellant is that the tribunal has committed an error by taking the monthly income only at Rs.2000/- though the evidence on record shows that the income was Rs.5000/- p.m. He submitted that looking to the serious injuries and permanent disability to the extent of 48%, the compensation of Rs.15,000/- awarded on account of pain and suffering is extremely on the lower side. He submitted that the evidence on record shows that the poultry business of the Appellant was closed for two years but the tribunal has taken the said period as only six months. He invited my attention to the oral and documentary evidence on record. He, therefore, submitted that the Appellant is entitled to substantial enhancement. The learned counsel for the third Respondent-insurer of the truck supported the impugned Judgment and Award.