JUDGMENT
S.S. Dwivedi, J.
1. By this judgment, both these appeals, which were filed by the claimants against the one and common impugned award, have been disposed of by this judgment. The main copy of the judgment is attached with M.A. No. 2179/2005 and a copy thereof is attached with M.A. No. 2180/2005.
2. Both the appellants being aggrieved by the impugned common award dated 19.4.2005 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaora, District Ratlam in Claim Case Nos. 52 and 53 of 2004, have preferred these appeals under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
3. Brief facts of the case are that appellant Kamlesh s/o Prabhulal and other appellant Kamlesh s/o Babulal were going on a motorcycle Bajaj Boxer MP-43 BA-7699 from Ratlam to Jaora, at that time, this motorcycle was dashed by a truck, number JR-31 G-1866, which was driven by respondent No. 1 rash and negligently and caused grievous injuries to both the appellants/claimants. This incident has been reported to P.S. Industrial Area Jaora, on which basis concerned police has registered a criminal case against the driver of the offending vehicle under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the Indian Penal Code and filed charge sheet against respondent No. 1, driver of the offending vehicle. Due to the grievous injuries sustained to the appellants, both the appellants have filed Claim Petition Nos. 52 and 53 of 2004 before the Claims Tribunal at Jaora, claiming compensation amount for the injuries sustained to them in this accident. Learned Tribunal, after appreciation of the evidence on record, decided both the claim petitions by a common award and awarded Rs. 67,712 in favour of appellant Kamlesh s/o Prabhulal in Claim Case No. 52/2004 and awarded Rs. 55,460 in favour of appellant Kamlesh s/o Babulal in Claim Case No. 53/2004. Feeling aggrieved by the quantum of the compensation amount, both the appellants have preferred these appeals.
4. Learned Counsel for respondent No. 3 in both the appeals supported the impugned award and submits that looking to the nature of the injuries sustained to the claimants, learned Tribunal, after assessment of the entire circumstances and the evidence rightly awarded the aforesaid compensation amount to the appellants and no material grounds are available for the enhancement of the compensation amount awarded to the appellants, therefore, prayed for dismissal of both the appeals.
5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. None of the Counsel assailed before this Court the cause of this accident as rash and negligent driving of the vehicle by respondent No. 1, which resulted grievous injuries to both the claimants in this accident. More over, this fact has been proved properly by adducing evidence by both the claimants before the Tribunal and this fact has also been proved by the documentary evidence also, therefore, in my opinion, learned Tribunal has rightly held that this accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the concerned offending vehicle by respondent No. 1, which resulted grievous injuries to the appellants.
7. With regard to the assessment of the compensation amount is concerned, in Claim Case No. 52/2004 with regard to claimant Kamlesh s/o Prabhulal, learned Tribunal assessed and found 25% permanent disability, which caused to the claimant by the injuries sustained to him in this accident, but assessed earning loss only on the basis of 10% disability. Looking to the nature of the injuries sustained to the appellant, assessment appears to be on lower side, when by cogent evidence appellant proved the fact that he sustained near about 25% permanent disability due to this injury, then the assessment of the Tribunal to the extent of 10% is liable to be enhanced at least by 20%.
8. Learned Tribunal assessed the income loss at the rate of 10% permanent disability at Rs. 40,320. When we assess the actual disability at 20%, then this amount is liable to be enhanced at least double this; total earning loss would come to Rs. 80,640, which appears to be just and reasonable compensation amount, which the appellant is entitled to get from the respondents jointly and severally. In other heads, whichever amount awarded by the Tribunal appears to be just and reasonable. Thus, the total compensation amount by adding the amount of Rs. 27,392 on the other heads will come to Rs. 1,08,032 (one lakh eight thousand thirty two), which the appellant is entitled to get from the respondents jointly and severally.
9. Similarly with regard to Claim Case No. 53/2004 is concerned, in this case also the claimant who by cogent evidence proved that injuries sustained to him caused permanent disability to the extent of 25% whereas learned Tribunal has assessed the permanent disability of 10% only. In view of the evidence on record, similarly this claimant Kamlesh s/o Babulal is also entitled to get compensation amount for disability of 20%. The compensation amount for the actual earning loss for the injuries sustained to him of Rs. 40,320 is liable to be enhanced to Rs. 80,640. In other heads, learned Tribunal has awarded compensation amount of Rs. 15,140. This appears to be just and reasonable and no enhancement is required on other heads. Thus, second appellant Kamlesh s/o Babulal is entitled to get compensation amount of Rs. 95,780 (ninety five thousand seven hundred eighty) from the respondents jointly and severally.
10. Resultantly, both the appeals are allowed and it is held that in M.A. No. 2179/2005, which relate to appellant Kamlesh s/o Prabhulal is entitled to get compensation amount of Rs. 1,08,032 (one lakh eight thousand thirty two) instead of compensation amount of Rs. 67,712. The enhanced amount of compensation will also bear interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realisation.
11. Similarly in M.A. No. 2180/2005, the appellant Kamlesh s/o Babulal is entitled to get compensation amount of Rs. 95,780 (ninety five thousand seven hundred eighty only) instead of compensation amount of Rs. 55,460, as awarded by the learned Tribunal. The enhanced compensation amount will also bear interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realisation. Parties to bear their own cost Counsel’s fee Rs. 1,000, if certified.