LAWS(MPH)-2021-4-74

ANIL Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

Decided On April 06, 2021
ANIL Appellant
V/S
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This miscellaneous appeal has been filed under Sec. 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award dtd. 27/1/2020 passed in Claim Case No.300132/2016 by Member, MACT Mandleshwar (West Nimar) District Khargone (MP) wherein, on account of the injuries suffered by the appellant/claimant, an award of Rs.1,67,530.00 (rupees one lac sixty seven thousand five hundred thirty) has been awarded to him.

(2.) Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that on 26/8/2016, at around 10.30 in the night, the respondent No.1 Vinod Sharma who also happens to be the owner of an Eicher Truck bearing registration number MP-13 GA-5109 dashed the appellant while reversing the aforesaid Eicher, rashly and negligently. The appellant suffered fracture in his pelvis bone and was also hospitalized for two days from 27/8/2016 to 29/8/2016. Doctor has also given him a disability certificate of 30% vide Ex.P/46. Subsequently, the claim case was also filed by the appellant wherein it was pleaded that he was working as a skilled MA No.2582/2020 workman earning around Rs.400.00 per day and Rs.12,000.00 per month. On account of the aforesaid injuries suffered by him in the accident, he has been totally disabled to perform his work as the skilled labourer (Mason). In the claim case, the learned Member of the MACT, after recording the evidence, has passed the award to the tune of Rs.1,67,530.00.

(3.) Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the award is on lower side and has been passed without taking into consideration the grievous injury suffered by the appellant; and is liable to be enhanced. It is further submitted that the learned MACT has considered the monthly income of the appellant to be Rs.4,000.00 and has calculated the income by applying the multiplier of Rs.17.00'. Counsel has submitted that the income of the appellant ought to have been considered to be Rs.12,000.00 per month for which cogent evidence was also led by him.