Sri Gonesh Choudhury v. The Regional Manager and 2 Ors,

JUDGMENT AND ORDER

(CAV) Heard Mr. A.R. Agarwala, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. A.J. Saikia, learned counsel representing the respondents.

¶2This is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the judgment and award dated 04.06.2016 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Goalpara in MAC Case No.86/2009.

¶3On 19.11.2008, Gonesh Choudhury was travelling from Goalpara to Guwahati in a bus bearing Registration No.AS-18A-0347. The bus was driven in a rash and negligent manner and therefore, it turned turtle. As a result of the accident, Gonesh Choudhury sustained injuries. In fact, he became 50% disabled because of the accident. The Medical Board gave him the certificate to that effect.

¶4When he filed a claim application before the Tribunal, his monthly income was notionally held to be Rs.4,000/-. The reason for this decision was that Gonesh Choudhury could not produce any documents in Page No.# 3/4 support of his income or profession.

¶5Though the Medical Board issued a certificate stating the disability of the claimant to be 50%, the Trial Court without any explanation held the disability to be 20% only.

¶6Finally, on the aforesaid yardsticks, the Tribunal granted a compensation of Rs.2,08,813/- only.

¶7I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of both sides.

¶8Here, at this stage, so far as notional monthly income is concerned, I have decided to agree with the Tribunal because there are no other evidence to prove the monthly income of the appellant.

¶9I find that without any explanation or reasoning, the Tribunal held the disability of the petitioner to be 20% even though the medical evidence clearly showed that the appellant sustained 50% disability.

¶10This Court is of the opinion that the Tribunal has erroneously applied the multiplier to be 15 whereas considering his age, the multiplier should have been 16 according to Sarla Verma's case, reported in (2009) 6 SCC

121.

¶11This Court is of the opinion that the award passed by the Tribunal deserves to be modified.

¶12The modified calculation would be like this –

Monthly income Rs.4,000/- Yearly income Rs.48,000/- Page No.# 4/4 Disability 50% Loss of earning due to disability – Rs.4,000/- X 12 X 50% X 16 = Rs.3,84,000/- Future prospect of 40% = Rs.1,92,000/- Medical expenses = Rs.19,813/- Incidental expenses = Rs.25,000/- Pain, shock and suffering = Rs.50,000/- Total

Rs.6,70,813/-

¶13Therefore, the claimant/appellant shall be entitled to receive Rs.6,70,813/-.

¶14The appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment stands modified. The Insurance Company is directed to pay the compensation of Rs.6,70,813/-. The amount of compensation shall carry an interest of 6% per annum with effect from 04.06.2016 i.e. the date when the judgment was passed by the Tribunal.

¶15The appeal is disposed of. Send back the LCR. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/4 GAHC010174702017 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oMACApp./141/2018ooooooooo SRIoGONESHoCHOUDHURYo R/OoVILL.oCHOWKoBAZAR,oP.S.oGOALPARAoTOWN,oDIST.oGOALPARA,o ASSAM. VERSUSo THEoREGIONALoMANAGERoANDo2oORS,o NATIONALoINSURANCEoCO.oLTD.oREPRESENTEDoBYoBONGAIGAON,o DIVISIONALoOFFICE,oP.O.ANDoDIST.oBONGAIGAONo(ASSAM) 2:MUSTT.oSALEHAoBEGUM oR/OoVILL.oHASILAPARA oP.O.oGOALPARAoTOWN oDIST.oGOALPARA oASSAM oPINo783101 3:MD.oABDULoKABILo@oABDULoMALIK oVILL.oBHATIPARA oNATUNoBASTI oP.O.oGOALPARA-783101 oDIST.oGOALPARA oASSAMo AdvocateoforotheoPetitionerooooo:oMR.oAoRoAGARWALAo AdvocateoforotheoRespondento:oMR.oAoJoSAIKIAoo oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Page No.# 2/4 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA For the Appellant : Mr. A.R. Agarwala, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. A.J. Saikia, Advocate. Date of Hearing: 25.01.2023. Date of Judgment: 17.03.2023.