Judgment : These two appeals by the insurer and the claimant arise out of the same judgment and award dated 21.02.2005 passed in MVC No.5067/2002 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore City. (‘Tribunal’ for short). The Tribunal by its impugned judgment and award, awarded a sum of Rs.73,600/-under different heads with 6% interest p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit as against the claim of Rs.4,00,000/- on account of the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. The insurer has challenged the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal as being on the higher side and also challenged the fastening of the liability on the insurer to pay the compensation, whereas, the claimant contended that, the quantum of compensation is inadequate and it requires enhancement. Both the insurer and the claimant felt necessitated to present these two appeals. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, claimant was aged about 24 years, was a painter by occupation and was earning an income of Rs.3,000/- per month. He was hale and healthy prior to the accident. It is contended by the claimant that, at about 10.30 p.m. on 24.9.2002 when he was traveling in the auto rickshaw bearing registration No.KA-02/8701 from Arakere to Bilakal, at that time, the driver of the tanker bearing registration No.KA-03/9320 drove the same in a rash and negligent manner, on Bannerghatta Road, in front of IIM, Bangalore and dashed against the auto rickshaw. Due to the impact, the claimant sustained injuries as follows: (i) Linear lacerated wound, vertical over left side forehead, bone deep. (ii) Lacerated wound below elbow bone deep. (iii) Multiple abrasions of various size and shape seen over left side forehead, face, chin and dorsum of foot. (iv) X-ray shows fracture of lower part of shaft of right femur. Out of the above injuries, (i) and (ii) are grievous injuries and other injuries are simple in nature. On account of the injuries, he was immediately admitted in the Abhaya Hospital and later on shifted to Victoria Hospital, where he was admitted for a period of 36 days as inpatient. The doctor has assessed the disability at 32% to the right lower limb and 16% to the whole body. On account of the injuries, he was immediately admitted in the Abhaya Hospital and later on shifted to Victoria Hospital, where he was admitted for a period of 36 days as inpatient. The doctor has assessed the disability at 32% to the right lower limb and 16% to the whole body. It is the case of the claimant that, he has spent some reasonable amount towards conveyance, nourishing, food and attendant charges including other incidental charges. Taking all these aspects into consideration, he filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the respondents. 3. The claim petition filed by the claimant had come up before the Tribunal for consideration, the Tribunal, in turn, after assessing the oral and documentary evidence and other materials available on record, has allowed the same in part and awarded a sum of Rs.73,600/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit, directing the insurer to satisfy the award. Being aggrieved by the fastening of liability and the quantum of compensation awarded, insurer has filed appeal and the claimant aggrieved by the quantum of compensation as being not just and reasonable, has presented the appeal, seeking appropriate reliefs as stated supra. 4. Learned counsel for the insurer at the outset, submitted that, fastening liability on the insurer is not sustainable and a liable to be set aside at the threshold. To substantiate his claim, he is quick to point out that, the driver of the tanker bearing registration No.KA-03/9320 did not possess a valid driving licence as on the date of accident. Therefore, question of fastening liability on the insurer is not justifiable and this stand/objection has been taken at the preliminary stage i.e., at the time of filing the written statement. This aspect of the matter has neither been looked into by the Tribunal nor considered or appreciated and without any justification, contrary to the evidence on record, has fastened the entire liability against the insurer, which cannot be sustained. Therefore, the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified, by exonerating the liability of the insurer and fastening the liability on the owner of the tanker. 5. Therefore, the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified, by exonerating the liability of the insurer and fastening the liability on the owner of the tanker. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the claimant, inter alia, contended and substantiated the liability fastened on the insurer and submitted that the quantum of compensation is not just and reasonable in so far as it pertains to the heads of conveyance, nourishing, food and attendant charges, loss of income during treatment period and the Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of future income and the income of the claimant assessed at the rate of Rs.2,400/-per month is on the lower side. The claimant was aged about 24 years and was a painter by occupation and therefore, atleast Rs.3,000/- ought to have been assessed to determine the compensation towards loss of future income and loss of income during treatment period. Therefore, she submits that, the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified by awarding just and reasonable compensation. 6. After careful consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the insurer and the claimant and after careful perusal of the impugned judgment passed by the tribunal, the points that arise for out consideration in these appeals are, (i) Whether the fastening of liability on the insurer is sustainable in law? (ii) Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable? Re:Point.1: 7. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the insurer Sri.C.R.Ravishankar that, it is a fact, the insurer has taken a specific stand in the written statement upon service of notice to the insurer that, the driver of the tanker bearing registration No. KA-03/9320 owned by Sri.Nagaraja did not possess valid and effective driving licence as on the date of the accident. To substantiate his claim, he has taken us through the original records in the file and pointed out the stand taken in the written statement and also more particularly, Ex.P2 the charge sheet wherein the driver has been prosecuted on the ground that he did not possess valid driving licence as on the date of accident. Therefore, we are of the view that, there is some substance in the submission made by the learned counsel for the insurer. 8. Therefore, we are of the view that, there is some substance in the submission made by the learned counsel for the insurer. 8. After critical evaluation of the material on record and after perusal of the written statement and also the charge sheet Ex.P2, it is crystal clear that, the driver did not possess the valid driving licence as on the date of accident and that, he has been prosecuted in the criminal proceedings. Therefore, the Tribunal has committed a grave error in fastening liability on the insurer. Therefore, we are of the considered view, at any stretch of imagination the said finding of fact cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, we set aside the same holding that, the insurer is not liable to satisfy the award amount and fasten the liability on the owner. Re.Point No.2: 9. The tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence and other material on file has awarded just and reasonable compensation towards injury pain and suffering at Rs.40,000/-, Rs.4,000/- towards medical expenses and Rs.15,600/- towards loss of amenities. Therefore, interference by this court is not called for. However, the Tribunal has erred in awarding only Rs.5,000/-towards conveyance, nourishing, food and attendant charges and Rs.9,600/-towards loss of income during laid up period by taking Rs.2,400/- per month for a period of four months and not awarded any compensation towards loss of future income. 10. The occurrence of the accident and the resultant injuries are not in dispute. The claimant has undergone treatment for a period of more than 36 days as inpatient and the doctor has assessed the disability of 32% to the right lower limb and if 1/3rd is taken, it comes to 10.66%, rounded off to 11% and accordingly we e-assess the permanent disability at 11% to the whole body. The Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the claimant at Rs.2,400/- p.m. which is on the lower side. The accident is of the year 2002, the claimant was aged about 24 years, by occupation he was a painter. Therefore, having regard to the experience as painter, we can be safely re-assess the income of the claimant at Rs.3,000/- per month. He was aged about 24 years and the appropriate multiplier is 18. The accident is of the year 2002, the claimant was aged about 24 years, by occupation he was a painter. Therefore, having regard to the experience as painter, we can be safely re-assess the income of the claimant at Rs.3,000/- per month. He was aged about 24 years and the appropriate multiplier is 18. Accordingly, we re-determine compensation towards conveyance, nourishing, food and attendant charges at Rs.10,000/- instead of Rs.5,000/- awarded by the tribunal, Rs.12,000/- towards loss of income during treatment period at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month for a period of four months, Rs.71,280/- towards loss of future income (Rs.3,000/- x 12 x11/100 x 18). In all, claimant is entitled to compensation under different heads as follows: TABLE In all, the claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.1,52,280/- as against Rs.73,600/- awarded by the tribunal. The enhanced compensation comes to Rs.78,680/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. 11. For the foregoing reasons, we pass the following: ORDER (I) The appeal filed by the insurer is allowed. (II) The judgment and award dated 21.02.2005 passed in MVC No.5067/2002 is hereby modified in so far as it relates to the fastening of liability on the insurer. The liability fastened on the insurer is set aside and the liability is fastened on Sri.N.Nagaraja – owner of the tanker bearing registration No.KA-03/9320. (III) Appeal filed by the claimant is allowed in part awarding a sum of Rs.78,680/- with 6% interest from the date of petition till the date of deposit, in addition to the amount awarded by the tribunal. (IV) The owner of the offending vehicle is directed to deposit the entire compensation amount of Rs.1,52,280/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment and award. (V) The enhanced compensation with interest shall be released in favour of the claimant immediately on deposit of the same by the owner of the offending vehicle. The apportionment and the manner of disbursement of compensation ordered by Tribunal remains undisturbed. The statutory amount deposited by the insurer shall be refunded to the insurer through the counsel immediately. Office to draw the awarded accordingly.