Mangaldas Onkardas Rathi vs Gopal Pralhadrao Tratak

R.K. Deshpande, J.—The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal passed an award on 19.04.2002 in M.A.C.P. No. 188 of 1998, granting compensation of Rs. 1,38,200/- to the claimant for 41% permanent disability suffered by him on account of the accident in question. The Tribunal awarded interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 03.08.1998 till its realisation.

The total claim of the claimant before the Tribunal was for an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- with interest. The computation of the claim is on the basis of salary of Rs.5,200/- per month plus Rs.1000/- which is the income per month received from the agricultural land, Rs.65,000/- spent on the medicines, other expenses regarding travelling etc., of Rs.55,000/-, and on account of mental agony, pain and suffering an amount of Rs.50,000/- was claimed. The Tribunal awarded Rs.65,000/- towards the expenses on the basis of the bills for medicines produced on record and an amount of Rs.18,000/- for transportation on the basis of bills so produced.

The learned counsel for the appellant relying upon the decision of the Apex Court in case of Jakir Hussein v. Sabir and others reported in 2016(1) Mh.L.J 151 urged that the Tribunal to award compensation on account of loss of future income due to disability, loss of income during the period of treatment, pain and sufferings, medical expenses, attendance charges during the period of treatment, transportation charges, special diet/nutrition, permanent disability/loss of amenity, happiness and enjoyment of life and future medical expenses. According to him, several of these heads have been ignored by the Tribunal in awarding the compensation.

The point for determination is; Whether the claimant is entitled to enhancement of compensation over and above one which is granted by the Tribunal?

The learned counsel for the appellant could not point of any evidence on record including even a bare statement on the part of claimant that he derived any income from the agricultural field. Merely because 7/12 extract is produced, that by itself is not enough to show that the claimant was earning an amount of Rs.1,000/per month out of agricultural operations. The Tribunal taken into consideration the monthly salary of the claimant at Rs.5,200/-, which not been disputed.

On account of medical expenses, the bills were produced at Exhs. 38 and 43 showing that Rs.65,000/- have been spent for purce of medicines and that is granted by the Tribunal. Out of Rs.55,000/- claimed towards expenses for travelling by jeep for routine check up, the Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.18,000/-, which is proved by producing the bills. On account of mental agony, pain and sufferings, an amount of Rs.50,000/ been awarded and there is no other claim made in the petition. In view of this, I do not find any fault in the view taken by the Tribunal and the claimant failed to establish the claim for enhancement of compensation.

In the result, the first appeal is dismissed.

No order as to costs.