GATTULAL Vs. RAMESH SOLANKI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred under Sec. 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the impugned award dtd. 09/04/2021 passed by Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Badnawar, District Dhar (M.P.) in MACC No.38/2018, whereby an amount of Rs.4,51,323.00 has been awarded from the date of filing of claim petition i.e. 27/03/2018 in favour of the appellant/claimant/injured with interest @ 6% per annum.

(2.) The case of the appellant is that he has suffered injuries in a Road Traffic Accident occurred on 24/01/2018 at about 04:00 am, when he was riding on his motorcycle with due diligence and was going towards Bhainsola. When he reached Semalkhedi Choupati nearby house of Thanna Dhakad, offending vehicle white coloured car bearing registration number MP-14-CB-3344 driven rashly and negligently collided with the motorcycle, due to which he fall down on the ground thereby suffering grievous injuries and fractures. He was admitted in District Hospital, Badnawar for treatment. Incident was reported to the concerned police station and after that he filed claim petition claiming an amount of Rs.9,15,000.00 from the respondents jointly and severally in the head of just and proper compensation.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant was 24 years of age on the date of accident and was Mason by profession. He has suffered fracture of right Thigh and left Femur and Tibia bone, whereby he has suffered disablement up to 55%, whereas learned Claims Tribunal has assessed the disability to the extent of 22% only, which is on lower side. He further submits that income of the appellant was to be assessed on guess work as he could not adduce any cogent evidence in this regard, therefore, as per the circular issued by the Labour Department of State of Madhya Pradesh under the Minimum Wages Act income should have been taken as Rs.7,125.00 per month, which has been taken only as Rs.6,000.00 per month by the learned Claims Tribunal, which is again on lower side. As per para 59.4 of the judgment by the Apex Court in the case of National Ins. Co. Ltd. Vs. Pranay Sethi & Ors. reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 , 40% was to be added in the head of Future Prospects, which has not been given. He further submits that in the heads of Pain and Suffering; Attendant; Conveyance; and Special Diet, the amount awarded is on lower side, therefore, prays for enhancement of the amount in the aforesaid heads thereby enhancing the total award amount. On these submissions, learned counsel prays for allowing the appeal.