and that, that was the reason, the disability at 80% was assessed by PW.3. No doubt, it was elicited in his cross examination that Ex.A-15 (sic.Ex.A-8) disability certificate issued by him, the then one of members of the Medical Board, contains the endorsement that the said certificate can not be used for judicial proceedings, but however, denied the suggestion that the disability assessed by him is not correct. Be that as it may, since the very amputation reflects the disability which amputation was above knee level of right leg, if not 80%, but, it can be construed at 60%, as the petitioner suffers from disfiguration throughout his left and yet to marry and his nature of employment being collection of amounts from the customers of his employer. The Tribunal has taken Rs.3,000/- as the monthly earnings of the petitioner, and the annual earnings works to Rs.36,000/-, and when the disability at 60% is taken into consideration, it comes to Rs.21,600/-. Since the petitioner was 25 years old on the date of accident, the relevant multiplier is ‘18’ as per the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sarla Verma (Smt) and others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and another[1] . When the multiplier ‘18’ is applied to Rs.21,600/-, it works out to Rs.3,88,800/-. Thus, the amount of Rs.3,88,800/- is granted as against Rs.3,06,000/-. The other amounts of Rs.20,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.38,000/- towards medicines and extra nourishment are maintained. Thus, in all, the petitioner is entitled to Rs.4,46,800/(Rupees four lakhs forty six thousand and eight hundred only) as against the amount of Rs.3,64,000/- granted by the Tribunal. The rate of interest at 7.5% granted by the Tribunal is maintained as per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Rajesh and others
