NAVINCHANDRA TEJPAL DOSHI Vs. DINESHBHAI BHAILALBHAI CHOKSHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 30.06.1998 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ahmedabad (for short, ?the Tribunal?) in M.A.C.P. No.488/1988 whereby, the claim petition was partly allowed and the respondents, original opponents, were jointly and severally held liable to pay compensation of Rs.55,529/- to the appellant, original claimant, along with interest at the rate of 15% per annum from the date of filing of application till its realization; and it was further directed that if the amount was paid within a period of two months, interest shall be calculated at the rate of 12% per annum.

(2.) THE facts in brief are that on 06.05.1988 at about 2030 hrs. while the appellant was coming out of a petrol pump on his scooter bearing registration no. GTM 2091, he was dashed by another scooter bearing registration no. GRA 7783 driven by respondent no.1 herein. As a result of the said accident, the appellant sustained severe bodily injuries. He filed a claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation of Rs.1,20 Lacs. However, the Tribunal awarded only Rs.55,529/- with interest, by way of the impugned award. Being aggrieved by the same, the appellant has preferred the present appeal for enhancement of the amount of compensation.

(3.) THE documentary evidence in the form of Disability Certificate of the appellant (Exhibit-39) and the oral evidence of Dr. Naresh P. Khandwala (Exhibit-45) reveal that the appellant suffered permanent disability of 18.33% for the body as a whole. Having gone through the award, I find that the Tribunal has not assigned any reasons while reducing the percentage of permanent disability to 10% for the body as a whole. THE only reason assigned by the Tribunal is that the appellant could continue to work since he was engaged in the profession of teaching, which, in my opinion, is improper. It is a matter of fact that the appellant sustained 18.33% permanent disability and therefore, the Tribunal ought to have assessed the income on that basis rather than assessing the permanent disability at 10%. Hence, the actual loss of income is required to be calculated by assessing the permanent disability at 18.33% for the body as a whole.