JUDGMENT Mr. Vijender Singh Malik, J.:- This is an appeal brought by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jhajjar (for short, “the Tribunal”) vide award dated 7.5.2010 whereby he has been awarded a sum of Rs.4,51,000/- alongwith 7.5% per annum interest on the amount of compensation from the date of filing the petition till the date of its realization. The facts of the case are not necessary to be reproduced here because the enhancement is sought on the aspect of loss of income due to permanent disability. 2. Disability of the claimant-appellant was proved on the record as 80% and a sum of Rs.3,36,000/- has been assessed as compensation for loss of income due to this disability. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant has been a driver and he has been visited by 80% disability. He has questioned the way in which learned Tribunal has concluded that this disability would reduce the earning capacity of the petitioner by at least 50%. According to him, he has taken the income of the claimant as Rs. 4,000/- per month. He has submitted that the appellant has been a driver and he has lost his left leg from above the knee joint and he has been rendered incapable of driving any vehicle. According to him, the multiplier system should have been adopted to assess the compensation in this case. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has submitted that compensation has been rightly assessed and there is no scope for enhancement in the same. According to him, the disability was, though 80% of left leg, it was rightly taken to reduce the earning capacity of the claimant by 50%. 5. The claimant-appellant is a driver. He lost his left leg from above knee joint. Dr. A.S.Gupta [PW-2] has testified to the fact that the appellant has suffered 80% permanent disability on account of the same. I could not agree with learned Tribunal in his approach that this disability would reduce the earning capacity of the appellant by at least 50%. The claimant has been rendered incapable of driving the vehicle at all. So, there is no reason why the compensation should not be assessed taking the disability as 80%. 6. I could not agree with learned Tribunal in his approach that this disability would reduce the earning capacity of the appellant by at least 50%. The claimant has been rendered incapable of driving the vehicle at all. So, there is no reason why the compensation should not be assessed taking the disability as 80%. 6. Since there is no proof of the income of the appellant above Rs.4,000/- per month, I take the loss caused to him in his income by Rs.3,200/- per month which on multiplication by 12, comes to Rs. 38,400/-. This amount the appellant annually lost in the accident on account of the permanent disability. The multiplier adopted by learned Tribunal is 14 and no exception is taken to the same. Multiplying this annual loss with 14, I find the appellant to have lost a sum of Rs. 5,37,600/- on account of the disability. Adding the other amount awarded by the Tribunal in a sum of Rs. 1,15,000/- to the aforesaid amount, I find the appellant to be entitled to Rs.6,52,600/- as compensation for the injuries and consequential disability suffered by the claimant in the accident. 7. Consequently, the appeal is allowed enhancing the compensation from Rs.4,51,000/- to Rs. 6,52,600/- with other terms regarding rate of interest etc. appearing in the award of the Tribunal remaining the same. ---------0.B.S.0------------ --------------------