JUDGMENT
Dipak Misra, J.
1. The appellant has called in question the sustainability of the award passed by the First Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Khandwa (for short ‘the Tribunal’) in Claim Case No. 99 of 1997 whereby the Tribunal has only awarded a sum of Rs. 1,11,000 in his favour whereas he had prayed for a sum of Rs. 9,25,000 as regards the nature of accident occurred and the disability suffered by him.
2. The facts which are necessary to be stated are that the claimant-appellant instituted a proceeding under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) on the ground that he was posted as a Senior Surveyor in the Department of Town Planning, Khandwa. On 1st May, 1997 when he was travelling on his Rajdoot motor cycle the offending Tempo Trax bearing Registration No. MP 19-0573 coming from opposite side dashed against him, being rashly and negligently driven by respondent No. 1, as a result of which the appellant suffered grievous injuries on his legs and waist causing fracture in his tibia, fibula and femur bones of the right leg. It was set forth before the Tribunal that the appellant took treatment at various hospitals and remained under treatment at Indore and Jalgaon upto 2nd September, 1998. It was further put forth that appellant can hardly walk without crutches and he has become permanently disabled in moving his right leg. It was set forth in the claim petition that he was drawing a salary of Rs. 5,000 from the Town Planning Department and he used to earn Rs. 1,00,000 per annum from his agricultural land and hence, he was entitled to a sum Rs. 9,25,000 as the compensation.
3. The owner and driver of the Tempo Trax, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein, remained ex parte before the Tribunal.
4. The insurer admitted that the vehicle was insured with it but refuted the claim on the asseveration that the driver of the truck did not have a valid driving licence at the time of accident, which did tantamount to breach of the policy condition and hence, it deserved exoneration.
5. Claims Tribunal framed as many as seven issues. It determined the quantum by holding that claimant-appellant spent a sum of Rs. 1,01,000 towards his treatment and other ancillary expenses and Rs. 10,000 towards physical and mental suffering. Thus, in toto, a sum of Rs. 1,11,000 has been awarded as compensation in favour of the claimant-appellant. It is worth while to mention here that the Claims Tribunal has recorded a finding that nothing has been brought on record to establish that the driver did not have a valid licence and thereby there had been breach of condition of policy.
6. The claimant-appellant has filed this appeal for enhancement of the awarded sum on the ground that the Tribunal has wrongly determined the compensation and has not taken into consideration the permanent disability caused to him owing to the accident.
7. Mr. Sunil Jain, the learned Counsel appearing for Insurance Company combated the aforesaid submission and supported the award passed by the Tribunal.
8. I have heard Mr. Anil Lala, learned Counsel forthe appellant and Mr. Sunil Jain, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 3.
9. The thrust of the matter is whether Tribunal has awarded just compensation in favour of claimant or the amount awarded deserves to be enhanced. On a scrutiny of the material brought on record it is evincible that the injured-claimant had sustained injuries as have been indicated hereinabove. Tribunal has taken note of certain receipts and has computed expenses which pertained to purchase of medicines, expenses on diet and transportation and on that score has fixed the amount at Rs. 1,01,000. As far as permanent disability is concerned, though disability certificates, Exts. A-56 and A-209 had been brought on record indicating 30 percent permanent disability but the Tribunal has not accepted the same on the ground that his income had not been affected. The Claims Tribunal has granted Rs. 10,000 towards mental suffering. On a perusal of the evidence it is demonstrable that claimant had suffered the disability. What has weighed in the mind of Tribunal is that there was no loss of income. Apart from the same the Tribunal has not taken other handicaps sustained by the claimant. It has come in the evidence that he has to use crutches. It is also brought out in evidence that he is not in a position to lead his normal life. The injuries have caused a permanent disability as a consequence of which his normal living is affected. In my considered opinion, the said facet cannot be totally ignored. The Claims Tribunal has grossly erred by excluding the said aspects from consideration while granting compensation. I am disposed to think that on this ground claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs. 50,000. As far as mental suffering is concerned, Tribunal has granted Rs. 10,000 which is quite low inasmuch as the claimant had undergone treatment at many a level and suffered mental agony and anguish. He has also remained in the hospital for considerable period of time. Considering the totality of circumstances, I think it appropriate to enhance amount of compensation in this score at Rs. 20,000
10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the amount of compensation would come to Rs. 1,71,000 (Rupees one lakh seventy-one thousand) only. The balance amount should be deposited before Tribunal within a period of three months from today. The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of presentation of the application till the date of deposition before the Tribunal.
11. The miscellaneous appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs.