SARWAR AALAM Vs. ARUN KUMAR CHANG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the appellant under section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against an award dated 25/3/2009 passed by the learned Tenth Member, M.A.C.T., Indore in Claim Case No. 219 of 2006. By the impugned award, the Claims Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs. 7,87,000 with interest to the appellant by way of compensation for the injuries sustained in the accident occurred on 28.5.2006.

(2.) THE appellant had preferred a claim petition under section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, seeking compensation to the tune of Rs. 24,00,000. According to the appellant, compensation awarded by the Tribunal is meagre and deserves enhancement. THErefore, by filing the appeal, inadequacy of the compensation has been assailed.

(3.) MR. Manoj Jain, the learned counsel appearing for respondent insurance company opposes the prayer for enhancement of compensation by filing cross-objection on 9.2.2010. It is contended by him that earnings of the deceased Rs. 4,000 per month as accepted by the Tribunal is arbitrary, because no account of employer to prove the earnings of the injured Rs. 4,000 has been filed, however, the Tribunal has committed an error in accepting the earnings at Rs. 4,000. So far as deduction of 1/3rd in the case of injury while calculating the compensation, it is fairly conceded by him that such deduction may not be made by the Tribunal. It is further contended by him that in the present case finding as recorded by the Tribunal that the appellant is having complete future loss of earnings due to permanent disablement, then in such circumstances the amount of compensation as per salary slip applying the multiplier theory would be just and proper, therefore, enhancement may not be directed.