ABHISHEK BHANDARI Vs. MANOJ KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant appeal is directed by the aggrieved disabled claimant/appellant herein (for short "disabled claimant"), against, the award pronounced by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-III Solan, District Solan, H.P (for short "Tribunal"), upon, MACT Petition No. 32ADJ-II/2 of 2015, (i) wherethrough compensation amount, borne, in a sum of Rs.95,555/- alongwith interest accrued thereon, at, the rate of 9% per annum, and, commencing from the date of award, till its realization, stood assessed, upon, him. The apposite indemnificatory liability, stood fastened, upon, the insurer of the offending vehicle i.e. respondent No.3 herein.

(2.) The learned counsel for the disabled claimant, has impugned the award, on, limited grounds, qua, (i) the learned Tribunal failing, to, assess compensation, under the head appertaining to, the loss of future earnings, and, also qua loss of earnings, as, entailed upon him, from, his tuitioning children rather remaining unassessed (ii) and, has also challenged the failure on the part, of, the learned Tribunal, to, assess compensation, for, evident loss of academic session, as, stood entailed, upon, the disabled claimant in sequel to his being encumbered with the injuries reflected, in, the apposite MLC.

(3.) However, the afore initial challenge cast, before this Court, by the learned counsel for the aggrieved disabled claimant, in as much as, the learned tribunal failing, to, award monetary compensation, vis-a-vis, loss of future earnings entailed, upon, the disabled claimant, in sequel, to, the requisite disability being entailed upon him, is, both legally frail, and, inefficacious as (a) PW-4 ( Dr. Pawan Thakur) though makes, in his examination-in-chief, a testification, qua, the fracture encumbered, upon, the disabled claimant, in sequel to the ill-fated mishap, begetting rectification, through insertion, of, interlocking nail, (b) yet when the afore has thereafter, not, made any echoing either in his examination-in-chief, or, in his cross-examination, that, hence the afore rectification also begetting the further sequel, of, the disabled claimant, being precluded, to, earn money from his hitherto avocations, of, tuitioning children, (c) thereupon, and, with the claimant in his cross-examination meteing a dis-affirmative answer, to, a dis-affirmative suggestion put to him, qua, his rearing an income of Rs. 10,000/- from his tuitioning children, (d) hence the disabled claimant was not entitled, to, any sum of compensation being determined, for, any loss of earning during the period, of, his hospitalization, if any, nor was entitled to computation of compensation vis-a-vis any loss of future earnings from his hitherto tuition work.