MOHAMMAD HUSSAIN Vs. IQUBAL HUSSAIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE claimant has filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation awarded to him vide award dated 30.7.1997 passed by Addl. Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mandsaur, in Claim Case No. 8/96.

(2.) THE appellant's case, in brief, was that on 26.12.1995 respondent No. 1 drove tempo No. M.P. 14 -8 -0583, belonging to respondent No. 2 and insured with respondent No. 3, in rash and negligent manner and dashed against the appellant on bus -stand Mandsaur, as a result of which the appellant suffered grievous injuries. He was admitted in Mandsaur Hospital and thereafter he was shifted to Bombay at Sir Hurkisondas Nurrottamdas Hospital and Research Centre where he was operated and plate was fixed in his hip bone. He became permanently disabled. He filed claim case seeking compensation of Rs. 5,50,000/ -. The respondents resisted the claim. The respondent No. 3 Insurance Company inter alia pleaded that respondent No. 1 had no valid driving licence and, therefore, it was not liable to pay compensation. The learned Tribunal on appreciation of evidence held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the tempo by respondent No. 1 and awarded compensation of Rs. 49,000/ - with interest @ 12% per annum and directed respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to pay the same.

(3.) WE considered the arguments advanced by Counsel for both sides and perused the record. The learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs. 15,000/ - for treatment, after taking into consideration the cash -memos and also the fact that some bills had been (sic). It also awarded Rs. 5,000/ - for going Bombay and awarded Rs. 5,000/ - for physical and mental pain and we find no reason to interfere in the amount. It has come in this evidence of the appellant Mohd. Hussain that he was working on the rope shop of Hemant Robe on the salary of Rs. 2,000/ - per month. The appellant has not examined Hemant nor filed his certificate. Under such circumstances, the Tribunal held that it was not proved that the appellant was paid Rs. 2,000/ - per month by the owner of the rope shop and assessed his earning at Rs. 1,200/ - per month and on the basis of 12% disability, calculated the loss of future earning at Rs. 100/ - per month and applied multiplier of 15 and worked out compensation at Rs. 18,000/ -. In our opinion, in view of Schedule II to Section 163A of the M.V. Act the earning of the appellant could not be taken less than Rs. 1,500/ - per month and under such circumstances, the monthly loss of future income would come to Rs. 125/ - and yearly Rs. 1,500/ -. On multiplying it with the multiplicand, the amount would come to Rs. 22,500/ -. The Tribunal also committed error in awarding Rs. 6,000/ - for loss of income for six months when he took his treatment and remained on bed rest. In view of above, the loss of income of the appellant for six months would come to Rs. 9,000/ -. Thus, we enhance the amount of compensation of Rs. 6,000/ - to Rs. 9,000/ - and Rs. 18,000/ - to Rs. 22,500/ -. Thus, the total amount of compensation comes to Rs. 56,500/ -.