circumstances, this Court do not find any illegality in the finding of the learned tribunal; who had the opportunity of seeing the claimant that the loss of earning because of the permanent disability of the claimant is 50%. So far as the contention of the appellant regarding the earning of the claimant to be Rs.9,000/- per month is concerned, for reasons best known to the claimant, the claimant has not brought any documentary evidence whatsoever regarding the bank account or the assets, if any, of the claimant to show his financial status. Under such circumstances, the assessment of Rs.7,800/- per month of the claimant by the learned tribunal appears to be just and proper and do not warrant interference either. But it is a settled principle of law that even in case of notional income, the future prospect is to be considered in view of the principle of law settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi , reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680 . Keeping in view that the age of the claimant at the time of accident was 41 years, 50% of the established income i.e. Rs.46,800/- is to be added towards future prospects. So the amount comes to Rs.58,500/- per annum in accordance to the guidelines laid down in para-59.4 in the case of National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Pranay Sethi (supra). By applying the multiplier 14, the amount comes to Rs.8,19,000/-. Adding to that Rs.3,00,000/under the other heads as already indicated above, the amount comes to Rs.11,19,000/-.
