The total companypensation of Rs.4,38,000/ with an interest at the rate of 7 p.a.
On the basis of the annual income, his future loss of income due to permanent disability suffered by him was estimated at Rs.1,72,800/ and loss of income at Rs.51,000/ .
The right arm of the appellant had severe companypound fractures preventing him from performing his regular work as a driver hereafter.
The relevant facts of the case are stated as under On 12.11.2008 at about 6.30 p.m., Jakir Hussein, the appellant herein, was driving a Tempo bearing registration No.
The appellant filed Claim Petition No.
was awarded to the appellant by the Tribunal as against a claim of Rs.8,80,000/ made by him.
3414 of 2010 by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore, wherein the High Court partly allowed the appeal of the appellant by modifying the award passed by the MACT, Mandsor, M.P., in claim case No.
Being unsatisfied with the enhanced companypensation by the High Court, the appellant filed this appeal.
Paipa Bai etc.
MP 14 G 0547 from Krishi Upaj Mandi, Mandsor to Multanpura village, Madhya Pradesh.
3414 of 2010 before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore.
A few others were also riding along with the appellant, namely, Santosh, Kumari Krishna, Smt.
It is further companytended by him that the monthly income of the appellant has been erroneously taken as Rs.3,000/ by the Tribunal and Rs.4,000/ by the High Court when he was actually earning Rs.4,500/ per month while working as the driver.
on the enhanced companypensation.
Due to the impact of the accident, the appellant sustained grievous injuries.
At the time of the said accident, the appellant was earning Rs.4,500/ per month by working as a driver.
The High Court opined that the income of appellant has been taken on the lower side by the Tribunal and determined the same at Rs.4,000/ per month.
Further, it has awarded interest at the rate of 8 p.a.
Aggrieved by the award of the Tribunal regarding inadequate companypensation, the appellant filed M.A. No.
3 of 2009 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal Additional First Member, Mandsor, Madhya Pradesh.
The Tribunal determined the permanent disability suffered by the appellant on account of the motor vehicle accident at 30 and his monthly income was taken at Rs.3,000/ for the purpose of assessing annual income of the appellant to companypute his loss of future earnings.
While the appellant was on the way, a tractor bearing registration No.
4,500/ per month as a driver of the motor vehicle.
GOPALA GOWDA, J. Leave granted.
MP 14 K 4886 which was driven by Sabir respondent number1 herein, in rash and negligent manner hit the appellants tempo which was companying from the opposite direction with enormous force.
This appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 24.01.2013 passed in M.A. No.
However, the Tribunal proceeded to determine his income at Rs.36,000/ per annum solely on the basis that there was numberevidence on record to prove the claim of the appellant that he was earning Rs.
The High Court has further awarded Rs.40,000/ towards medical expenses during the pendency of the appeal.
3 of 2009 dated 29.07.2010.
