@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
Rohit Arya, J.—This appeal is preferred by the claimant for enhancement of compensation, being aggrieved by award dated 25/4/2007 passed by the President, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Morena in Claim Case No. 111/2006, whereby the Claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,02,100/- in all towards compensation for injuries sustained by the appellant.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the claimant was injured in an road accident occurred on 24/3/2004, when, claimant who was Conductor in Bus No. M.P. 07/B-1478 was in bus and when bus reached near bridge, truck No. HR 38/H- 8026 driven by respondent No. 2 rashly and negligence dashed the bus towards front side due to which bus turned turtle. In the aforesaid accident, appellant sustained grievous injuries on right hand and right leg, amounting to disability to the extent of 40%, hence, he filed the application for compensation.
3. As per finding arrived at by the Claims Tribunal, the appellant was about 24 years of age. He was earning Rs. 2,300/- per month.
4. The contention raised by the counsel for the appellant is that the Claims Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of appellant and also applied multiplier of 15 instead of 18 in light of decision of Hon. Supreme Court in Sarla Verma and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, 2009 ACJ 1298. Learned counsel further contended that the Claims Tribunal has not awarded attendant charge and travelling expenditure to the appellant. Further no amount has been awarded under the head of future prospects.
5. Ms. Vandana Kekre, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 has contended that the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is just and proper.
6. As per finding of the Claims Tribunal the loss of monthly income to the appellant is Rs.2,300/- per month and yearly comes to Rs.27,600/-. As per schedule appended to the Motor Vehicle Act, the multiplier of 17 is applicable to the age group 21 to 25 years, which has not been applied by the Tribunal, therefore in the opinion of this Court, Claims Tribunal has committed mistake in applying multiplier of 15. Further, in the opinion of this Court the amount awarded by Claims Tribunal under the head pain and suffering is on the lower side. Apart from this the Claims Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the head attendant charge, special diet, travelling expenditure and future prospectus looking to the fact that appellant sustained disablement to the extent of 40% and his left leg has been amputated. Therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the amount of compensation deserves to be further enhanced by a further sum of Rs. 1,25,000/- in lump sum.
7. Thus, this Court awards a further sum Rs. 1,25,000/- in lump sum. Thus, the total compensation comes to Rs. 3,27,100/- (Rs. Three Lacs Twenty Seven Thousand and One Hundred only). The compensation enhanced by this Court to carry the interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing claim petition till realisation.
8. Resultantly, the appeal is allowed. No order as to cost.
