This appeal is preferred against the award in O.P.(MV)No.2173/2003 of the Addl. Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thrissur. The appellant sustained injuries in a motor accident and the learned Tribunal awarded compensation of Rs.2,13,400/- with interest and cost. Being dissatisfied by that amount, the appellant preferred this appeal. There is no dispute with regard to the accident. The insurer admitted the insurance of the vehicle. This appeal was tried along with OP(MV) Nos.2174/03 and 2175/03. The appellant evidence consists of the documentary evidence of Exts.A1 to A15. Respondents evidence consists of Ext.B1.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that only a meagre amount was awarded by the Tribunal. The injured was working abroad as a foreman in Light Industries and Aluminium Company, Kuwait and was getting Rs.30,000/- per month, but the M.A.C.A. No. 2196 of 2010 learned Tribunal took only Rs.2,500/- as his monthly income, which is a meagre amount.
3. Apex court in Dixit Kumar and Ors. v. OM Prakash Goel (2017 ACJ 2057) held that in the absence of any contra evidence, the evidence submitted by the petitioner has to be admitted. Since, injured is a foreman, the Tribunal has to take Rs.8,000/- as his monthly income. In addition to that, he is entitled to get 40% increase in view of the decision rendered in National Insurance Company V. Pranay Sethi [2017 (4) KLT 662 (SC)]. If that be the position, he is entitled to get additional amount of Rs.3,200/-. The total income will be Rs.11,200/- . Hence, the following additional amount is awarded as compensation. Loss of income for six months at the rate of Rs.8,000/- is Rs.48,000/-. The Tribunal awarded Rs.15,000/-. The balance is Rs.33,000/-.
4. Apex court in Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar [2011(1) KLT 620 (SC)] held as follows: M.A.C.A. No. 2196 of 2010
Comments