IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA FAO No. 110 of 2006 Date of Decision: 25th August, 2010 __________________________________________________________ Baria Ram ….Appellant. Versus Krishan Kumar & others ….Respondents. __________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 __________________________________________________________ For the Appellant: Mr. D.P. Chauhan, Advocate. For Respondents No.1 & 2: Mr. Rajesh Mandhotra, Advocate. For Respondent No.3: Ms. Sunita Sharma, Advocate __________________________________________________________ Dev Darshan Sud, J (oral). The appellant is aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shimla awarding a sum of Rs. 90,000/- in all for the disability which the petitioner suffered in the accident. The factum of accident is not disputed. What is in question in this appeal is the quantum of compensation awarded to the petitioner. 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2. I have gone through the evidence on record and I have heard learned counsel for the parties. PW3 Dr. Ravinder Mokta appeared as Court witness to testify the nature of injuries suffered by the appellant. He was summoned as a court witness. I am unable to find any reason why he was not summoned by the appellant himself. The injury has been proved on record by the Doctor vide Ext.PA which shows that the petitioner has suffered 42% permanent disability. This aspect has not been challenged by the respondents before the learned Tribunal. 3. It is also not disputed that the petitioner was working as carpenter. What is in dispute is the income earned by the petitioner. The learned Tribunal, on estimation, held that taking into consideration the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, Rs. 500/- per month would be the loss of earning capacity of the petitioner . For this purpose, the estimate income of the petitioner has been calculated at Rs. 1500/- per month on the ground that the petitioner is illiterate and unskilled person. I find that this estimate is very meager. In Lata Wadhwa and others Vs. State of Bihar and others (2001) 8 SCC 197, the Supreme Court held that for a house wife, doing no other work, the income can be safely assessed at Rs. 3,000/- per month. The estimation by the learned Tribunal is not only meager but unrealistic. The learned Tribunal held that the petitioner being carpenter cannot now exert his full physical strain as he has been crippled and can only do the work while sitting. In these circumstances, I hold that the estimate worked out by the tribunal is not in accordance with law. For future earning capacity, the learned Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 60,000/- and for treatment awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- and for pain, shock and sufferings, the learned Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 20,000/-. In all, the Tribunal granted a sum of Rs. 90,000/- to the petitioner. 3 3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has placed reliance on judgment of this Court in New India Assurance Co. vs. Satya Parkash Thakur & others, 2006(Suppl) Cur.L.J.(H.P.) where a sum of Rs. 4 lacs was awarded for spinal injuries. Learned counsel urged that the facts and ratio of this judgment are squarely attracted to this case. I am unable to accept this contention. In Satya Parkash Thakur’s case the injury was suffered by a young girl aged about 23 years. She was not in a position to do any physical work throughout her life. I find from the record that at the time of accident the petitioner was aged about 52 years and the nature of injury is not such which has totally crippled him. In the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I award an additional sum of Rs. 50,000/- for the loss of earning capacity, in addition to the award passed by the learned Tribunal. This amount shall carry interest at the rate of 7% per annum from the date of award till its payment. No other point is urged in this petition. Appeal stands disposed of. August 25th, 2010 (Dev Darshan Sud) (ms) Judge