JUDGMENT : HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J. 1. The present Appeal is filed by the appellant-original claimant seeking enhancement of the compensation amount awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), Fast Track Court No. 2, Vadodara, (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) vide impugned judgment and award dated 16.10.2007 passed in M.A.C.P. No. 210 of 2002, whereby the Tribunal has partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs. 3,25,000/-. 2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that, on 04.02.2003, the present appellant was the drive of the Luxury Bus bearing registration No. GJ-17-W-9832 and was going on a tour with passengers to Himachal Pradesh. On 24.05.1999, when the appellant reached Vaknagadh in Himachal Pradesh, at that time, respondent No. 1-driver of another Luxury Bus bearing registration No. HP-07-3476 coming from opposite direction in a rash and negligent manner with excessive speed, suddenly dashed with the bus of the appellant. Due to this accident, the appellant sustained serious injuries and got severe fractures on right femur and left leg. The appellant was operated thrice by inserting plates and screws. The accidental injuries resulted into permanent disablement of 57.03% (body as a whole) on left and right leg. Hence, the appellant-original claimant has filed M.A.C.P. No. 210 of 2002 before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after evaluating the pleadings and evidence tendered by the parties, partly allowed the claim petition and awarded a sum of Rs. 3,25,000/- under different heads as against the claim of Rs. 7,00,000/-. 3. It came to be held by the Tribunal that said amount was ordered to be awarded to the deponents. Not being satisfied with the compensation amount, this appeal has been filed. 4. Heard Mr. Hiren M. Modi, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, Mr. Sunil B. Parikh, the learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3-National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Ms. Hina Desai, the learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 5-United India Insurance Co. Ltd. 5. Mr. Hiren Modi, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted the same facts which are narrated in the memo of appeal. He has submitted that the Tribunal has not properly appreciated the income of the appellant while determining the quantum. Ltd. and Ms. Hina Desai, the learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 5-United India Insurance Co. Ltd. 5. Mr. Hiren Modi, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted the same facts which are narrated in the memo of appeal. He has submitted that the Tribunal has not properly appreciated the income of the appellant while determining the quantum. He further submitted that the Tribunal has committed an error by not considering the permanent partial disablement as the appellant sustained severe fractures on right and left leg and because of that his enjoyment of life is also not considered in its true and perspective spirit by the Tribunal. He further submitted that the Tribunal has also committed an error by not applying proper multiplier. He further submitted that at the time of accident, the lower court has failed to consider prospective income and adverse effect on the said prospective income and hence, the Tribunal has committed an error on all other grounds raised in the memo of appeal and has sought modification of the impugned judgment and award and enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. 6. As against that Mr. Sunil B. Parikh and Ms. Hina Desai, the learned counsels appearing for the respective Insurance Company have supported the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and submitted that the award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper and, therefore, no interference is called for. 7. Having considered the averments made in the appeal, submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both the sides and considered the facts of the case and perused the record and proceedings, it is true that at the time of accident, the injured was 40 years and sustained serious injuries and severe fractures and therefore, considering all these aspects, the present appeal deserves to be allowed in part and the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is required to be modified to the extent. 8. It is pertinent to note here that, the appellant-original claimant has sustained fracture injury in his both legs and for that he sustained permanent partial disablement. 8. It is pertinent to note here that, the appellant-original claimant has sustained fracture injury in his both legs and for that he sustained permanent partial disablement. He was working as a driver in Luxury Bus and now, after the date of accident, he has lost his work as he is unable to drive any vehicle for whole life and considering his age and his work, the Tribunal has committed error while awarding the amount of compensation. Moreover, considering the permanent disablement caused to the appellant-original claimant in view of the settled legal position laid down by the Apex Court in case of Sarla Verma and Others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, (2009) 6 SCC 121 and National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and Others, (2017) 16 SCC 680 adequate and just compensation is required to be awarded. Herein in the present case, the appellant-original claimant has sustained permanent partial disablement. As he was working as a driver, now he is unable to carry his vocation as a driver and therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the appellant is entitled to get additional amount of compensation considering the injury sustained by the appellant and therefore, the appeal requires to be allowed and the impugned judgment and award requires to be substituted by enhancing the amount of compensation and, therefore, the compensation is enhanced under the following heads: Particulars Amount Actual Loss of Income Rs. 19,200/- Future Loss of Income (Rs. 3200/- + Rs. 1280/- (40% rise) = Rs. 4480/- x 59% = Rs. 2643 x 12 = Rs. 31716 x 15) Rs. 4,75,740/- Pain, shock and suffering Rs. 50,000/- Future Medical Expenses Rs. 30,000/- Loss of amenities Rs. 50,000/- Special diet Rs. 20,000/- Attendant charges Rs. 10,000/- Transportation Rs. 25,000/- Total Rs. 6,79,940/- Compensation awarded (-) Rs. 3,25,000/- Amount to be enhanced Rs. 3,54,940/- Accordingly a sum of Rs. 3,54,940/- as additional compensation requires to be awarded towards future loss of income, which is just and reasonable compensation and the same is awarded in addition to Rs.3,25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. However, the appellant is entitled to the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 3,54,940/- along with interest at the rate of 6% from the date of application till realization of the amount. However, the appellant is entitled to the enhanced amount of compensation of Rs. 3,54,940/- along with interest at the rate of 6% from the date of application till realization of the amount. 8.1 The Tribunal held the drivers of both the offending vehicles as 25% (present appellant) and 75% (respondent No. 1 herein) negligent for the alleged accident, and as per the award passed by the Tribunal, both the Insurance Companies have deposited the said amount of compensation. But, considering the fact that this Court has not gone into the part of negligence and the present appeal is partly allowed and the amount of compensation is enhanced, both the Insurance Companies shall deposit the enhanced amount of compensation as per the award of the Tribunal. 9. For the foregoing reasons, the following order is passed: (i) Appeal is allowed in part. (ii) Judgment and award dated 16.10.2007 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Aux), Fast Track Court No. 2, Vadodara in M.A.C.P. No. 210 of 2002 is hereby modified and in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal, a sum of Rs. 3,54,940/- as additional amount with interest at the rate of 6% per annum is awarded, which shall be from the date of filing claim petition till date of its realization. (iii) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit additional amount of compensation with 6% interest as early as possible within an outer limit of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (iv) The apportionment and order for disbursement as made by the Tribunal in the operative portion of the order shall hold good for the additional amount of compensation. (v) After deposit of the additional amount of compensation, the same shall be disbursed in favour of the claimant through RTGS, after proper verification. The bank account details shall be furnished by the learned advocate for the claimant to the Nazir Department of the Court concerned. (vi) The appellant is directed to pay deficit court fees, if any, on the enhanced amount within one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 10. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Tribunal forthwith. Pending civil applications, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly.