NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE injured -appellant has preferred this appeal Under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, for enhancement of the amount of compensation and being aggrieved with the impugned award dated 3.8.96 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kotputali, whereby the learned Tribunal rias awarded total compensation of Rs. 96,000/ - In his favour as under: Rs. 5,000/ - for medical expenses,' Rs. 6,000/ - for one and half month leave during which he remained under treatment, Rs. 441/ - for transportation charges, Rs. 40,000/ - for mental agony, Rs. 44,400/ - for 44.4% permanent disability The only submission of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the learned Tribunal committed an illegality in not awarded adequate compensation in respect of 44.4% permanent disability suffered by the appellant. He contended that at the relevant time in the year 1989, the salary of the appellant was Rs. 4,000/ - and he was 36 years of age. If the multiplier system is adopted and multiplier of 16 is applied, the amount of compensation comes to Rs. 3,37,920/ - in view of 44% permanent disability. He, therefore, contended that the amount of Rs. 44,400/ - awarded under this head, may be enhanced to the amount of Rs. 3,37,920/ -.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the respondents contended that the accident in the present case took place in the year 1989 and looking to the year of accident, the total amount of compensation of Rs, 96,000/ - cannot be said to be a meager amount, the said amount is just and reasonable. He further submits that Second Schedule of Section 163 -A of the M.V. Act, 1988 was inserted in the year 1994 and before 1994 the multiplier system was applicable in the death cases only but so far as the injury cases are concerned, the multiplier system was not applicable as per various judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court also. He, therefore, contended that the amount of compensation for permanent disability should not be calculated by adopting the multiplier system in the present case. He further submits that appellant is still working in the Govt. Hospital/medical college and Is getting full salary and has also got promotion and benefit of revised pay scale, therefore, he is not entitled to get any amount of compensation under this head.;