R. M. Chhaya, J. - (1.)Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and award dated 26.04.2007 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), Ahmedabad in MACP No. 306 of 2001, the original claimant has preferred this Appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act").
(2.)The following facts emerge from the record of the appeal -
2.1 That the accident took place on 27.08.2000 between 8.00 PM to 8.15 PM. It is the case of the appellant-claimant that while the appellant was travelling in Maruti Van bearing registration No. GJ-1-HE-6167 along with his wife and child and was passing through S.P. Stadium Cross Roads, a TATA 407 (mini truck) being driven by respondent no.1 in rash and negligent manner, dashed with the Maruti Van. It is the case of the appellant that appellant sustained serious injuries on his right hand and was admitted to private hospital named Divya Darshan Hospital, Paldi. It is further the case of the appellant that he took discharge from the said hospital and was taken to Palanpur where again he was admitted in the hospital for 20 days. It further transpires from the record that even thereafter, the appellant was admitted to the hospital of Dr. Kirit Shah on 21.09.2000 for bone grafting regarding injury on right shoulder and plate came to be inserted and ultimately, after bone marrow, the appellant was discharged on 30.09.2000. As per the appellant, even thereafter, he took treatment from Dr.Shrikant Gupta. It is the case of the appellant that again he was operated on the right hand and bone marrow and bone grafting was made and ultimately, the appellant was discharged from hospital on 28.11.2000. The appellant filed the present claim petition under section 166 of the Act and claimed compensation of Rs. 20 lakhs. It was the case of the appellant that he was 21 years old on the date of the accident and was working as a Notary Public. Various contentions were raised before the Tribunal. The appellant was examined at exhibit 35. Dr.P.M. Vekaria was examined at exhibit 43. Over and above the same, the appellant adduced documentary evidence in form of disability certificate at exhibit 44, copy of income tax return at exhibit 50 to 53, FIR at exhibit 58, panchnama of the place of incident at exhibit 58, injury certificate at exhibit 60, medical bills at exhibit 61. The Tribunal after appreciating the evidence on record, came to the conclusion that the appellant had sustained permanent disability of 32% and considered his income based upon the income tax return at Rs. 8000/- per month. The Tribunal also came to the conclusion that drivers of both the vehicle, i.e., Maruti Van and Tata 407, both are liable for the accident and assessed the liability in the ratio of 40:60 and while partly allowing the claim petition, awarded Rs. 4,60,800/-, as compensation under the head of future loss of income, Rs.32,000/- under the head of actual loss of income, Rs. 15,000/- towards pain, shock and suffering, Rs.4,000/- for special diet, Rs. 3,000/- for attendant charges, Rs.5,000/- towards transportation and Rs. 70,000/- for the medicines and medical treatment and thus, awarded total compensation of Rs. 5,89,800/- and after deducting 40% contributory negligence on the part of the appellant, as driver of the Maruti Van, awarded compensation of Rs. 3,53,900/- with 8% interest from the date of filing of the claim petition till its realization. Being aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed.

(3.)Heard Mr. Hiren Modi, learned advocate for the appellant and Mr. Vibhuti Nanavati, learned advocate for respondent no.3 insurance company. Though served, no one appears for the other respondents.