Chandrakant vs Deenanath

A.V. Chandrashekara, J.—Lone claimant in a case in MVC. 313/08 is before this court challenging the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal on 22.8.2011.

The main grievance of the appellant is that compensation of Rs. 4,82,600/- awarded is inadequate and unjust. It is his argument that the claim towards medical expenses is to the extent of Rs. 5,06,844/- and the Tribunal has awarded only Rs. 1,77,000/- without giving any acceptable reason for rejecting the medical bills of higher amount. It is argued that the amount of compensation awarded under other heads are inadequate.

The following compensation is awarded under different heads as found in paragraph 13 of the judgment:

The entire records have been called for. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Medical bills have been produced and marked as Exs. P18, 22 and 13. Ex. P22 consists of 147 medical bills; Ex. P13 consists of 63 bills. The reasons assigned by the Tribunal in regard to granting only Rs. 1,76,216/- towards medical expenses is at paragraph 12 of the judgment which is as follows:

"Further with respect to medical expenses is concerned, since he has produced medical bills and those bills have been marked subject to objections among those bills, some bills are repeated bills and even though there is no any documents about follow up treatment taken and some bills are discarded because they are apparently not genuine one and some bills are genuine one and they are considered and as per Ex. P13 (63) medical bill have been produced, and also ex. P18 and Ex. P22 (147) medical bills have been produced and hence total of these medical bills comes to Rs. 1,76,216/- which is rounded upto Rs. 1,77,000/- is just and proper."

Admittedly the injured was admitted to a hospital at Meeraj and was in-patient for 90 days. He had sustained fracture of shaft of femur of right leg and fracture of tibia and fracture of tibial shaft mallelous. He was aged 42 years as on the date of the accident. He was operated 2-3 times and all discharge summaries have been produced.

The reasons assigned in regard to rejection of medical bills are not cogent and convincing. When the amount is claimed under the head "medical expenses," that too supported by documentary evidence, the court is expected to scrutinize each bill and assign its reasons for either accepting or rejecting the same. No such attempt is made by the Tribunal. The amount awarded under the head "pain and suffering" is also too inadequate more particularly when he was in-patient for 90 days and has undergone 2-3 operations. Similarly Rs. 10,000/- awarded under the head "loss of amenities" and Rs. 9,000/- towards loss of income during the laid up period are also quite inadequate. Just and reasonable amount is to be awarded not only for the period of treatment but also during the period of his inability to work for gain.

Taking into consideration that he had to go to Meeraj four times to undergo operations and again for follow-up, Rs. 8,000/- awarded under the head "conveyance and other charges" is also inadequate. The Tribunal is expected to take into consideration the hard realities of life while granting compensation. Whatever compensation is awarded must be "just" and it must be within the parameters of Section 166, Motor Vehicles Act. After analyzing the evidence placed on record, this court is of the opinion that the matter needs to be remitted to the trial court with a direction to consider the medical expenses claimed by the claimant meticulously, and also to consider the claim for compensation under different heads keeping in view just compensation has to be awarded. Hence appeal will have to be allowed.

Hence I pass the following order:

ORDER

The appeal is allowed. The judgment and award in MVC. 313/08 on the file of MACT-12, Bijapur, are set aside. The matter is remitted to the MACT-12, Bijapur, to consider the case afresh. Parties to appear before the Tribunal on 12.1.2015 without fail and the Tribunal shall dispose of the matter within three months thereafter. Parties are at liberty to lead any additional evidence if need be, under the circumstances of the case.

Office to send a copy of the judgment along with the entire records to the Tribunal forthwith.