- (1.) This appeal is at the instance of the claimant/petitioner Gouri Sankar Mishra against a judgment and award dated 28th July, 2010 passed by the learned Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, 1st Court, Barasat, North 24-Parganas, in MAC Case No.46 of 2009 renumbered as MAC Case No.18 of 2009. Claimant is the appellant in this appeal. It is the case of the claimant/appellant that on 19th December, 2008 at about 8.30 p.m. near Lauhati Service Station (Petrol Pump) under Rajarhat Police Station a bus being the offending vehicle bearing No.WBS-3900 which was proceeding through Lauhati road in a most rash and negligent manner endangering human life and safety and violating all traffic rules and regulations, hit the claimant, knocked him down and ran over his right leg. As a result, the claimant/appellant sustained severe injuries on his person and filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming a sum of Rs. 6,90,000/- (Six Lakh Ninety Thousand) only as compensation plus cost and interest on account of pecuniary and non-pecuniary loss. Respondent/owner did not contest the case whereas respondent/insurance company contested the case by filing a written statement denying the claims and contentions of the petitioner. Respondent/Insurer also filed an application under Section 170 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
(2.) From the oral and documentary evidence adduced by the claimant/appellant it appears that the accident was caused by the offending vehicle on 19th December, 2008 and because of the said accident the claimant sustained grievous injuries on his person and, ultimately, his right leg had to be amputated below the knee. Because of this amputation he has become permanently disabled person. According to the disability certificate given by the hospital he has been permanently disabled to the extent of 60% and unable to move or to do any normal work without assistance of anyone. He is a man of 46 years. He was working as a security guard at Protection Bureau and was earning a sum of Rs. 3,000/- (Three Thousand) only from the said organisation per month. Apart from his job of security guard he used to earn a sum of Rs. 3,000/- (Three Thousand) only per month as a salesman of sari. He had already spent more than Rs. 1,00,000/- (One Lakh) only towards medical treatment and that he needs periodical check up and further that he would need continuous treatment for the rest of his life. PW 4, Dr. Susanta Kumar Biswas, in his deposition stated that on 12th February, 2010 one disability certificate was issued from the Board of Nadia District Hospital, Krishnanagar in favour of the claimant/appellant and it was further stated that there had to be an amputation below knee on the right leg having 60% disability. The appellant's disability certificate was marked Exhibit 11. The doctor, PW 4 also brought the handicapped certificate register of the hospital while deposing before the Claims Tribunal and the said register was marked Exhibit 12. In cross-examination the said witness stated that he did not treat the claimant/appellant but that he has followed the guidelines given in the Gazette of India Extraordinary dated 13th June, 2001 for the purpose of assessment of disability of the claimant.
(3.) The Claims Tribunal, on consideration of the evidence on record, held that the claimant/appellant would only prove that he was working at the Protection Bureau as a security guard and his wages was Rs. 3,000/- (Three Thousand) only per month. It has also been held by the Tribunal that the claimant could not substantiate his other source of income. Tribunal Held that the petitioner was 45 years of age and he was entitled to the multiplier of 13. Accordingly, taking into account of his income of Rs. 3,000/- (Three Thousand) only per month, that is, Rs. 36,000/- (Thirty Six Thousand) only per year multiplied by multiplier 13 the claimant/appellant has been found entitled to a sum of Rs. 4,68,000/- (Four Lakh Sixty Eight Thousand) only but since his disablement was held to be 60%, the learned Tribunal found that the claimant was entitled to Rs. 2,80,800/- (Two Lakh Eighty Thousand Eight Hundred) only as compensation. In addition to the said sum the Tribunal has also held that the claimant would be entitled to medical bills for a sum of Rs. 23,925/- (Twenty Three Thousand Nine Hundred Twenty Five) only, Rs. 2,295/- (Two Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Five) only and Rs. 5,278/- (Five Thousand Two Hundred Seventy Eight) only which makes a total of Rs. 3,12,298/- (Three Lakh Twelve Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Eight) only. As regards non-pecuniary loss as detailed in the claim petition, the Tribunal has assessed it at Rs. 1,00,000/- (One Lakh) only on account of injury, normal longevity of the life of the person concerned being shortened, disfigurement and discomfort or inconvenience, hardship, disappointment and frustration. Accordingly, the claimant/appellant was made entitled to total compensation of Rs. 4,12,298/- (Four Lakh Twelve Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Eight) only. The Tribunal directed the Insurer to issue an account payee cheque of Rs. 4,12,298/- (Four Lakh Twelve Thousand Two Hundred Ninety Eight) only in the name of the petitioner within one month from the date of the award together with an interest @ 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim case, that is, 16th January, 2009 till payment of the entire amount.;