Cherukuvada Radhakrishna Murthy vs Khandavalli Babji and Others

S. Dasaratharama Reddy, J.—In this appeal filed by the claimant against the award of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Rajahmundry, the appellant claims further damages of Rs. 7,000/- in addition to Rs. 18,000/- granted by the Tribunal u/s 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the ''Act'').

According to the petition, on 7-12-1984, the appellant who was going on cycle in Rajahmundry town was hit by a lorry bearing No. A.B.P. 7889 due to the rash and negligent driving of its driver as a result of which the appellant sustained fracture to his left leg and multiple injuries all over his body. The appellant was aged 40 years and he was a lorry cleaner by profession. Due to the accident, he was permanently disabled due to the shortening of the leg by 4 inches. The appellant claimed Rs. 3,200/- for medical expenses, Rs. 800/towards cost of wrist watch and cycle, Rs. 4,000/- towards compensation for pain and suffering, Rs. 15,000 /- towards compensation for permanent disability and Rs. 2,000/- for the loss of earning power, totalling Rs. 25,000/-.

The respondents opposed the petition denying rash and negligent driving of the driver and sustaining of injuries by the claimant. The Tribunal found that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver and awarded compensation of Rs. 18,000/- comprising of Rs. 5,000/- towards damages for pain and suffering Rs. 3,000/- towards medical expenses and cost of clipper purchased and Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of future earnings.

Neither the owner nor the Insurance Company has preferred any appeal against the award of the Tribunal. In this appeal the claimant is seeking recovery of balance of Rs. 7,000/- refused by the Tribunal.

Mr. A. Krishna Murthy, the learned Counsel for the appellant contends that in view of the permanent disability suffered by the claimant viz., shortening of the left leg by 4" and as he underwent five operations and was hospitalised for four months, the appellant is entitled to a minimum of Rs. 15,000/- towards compensation for pain and suffering, loss of amenities of life and loss of expectation of life. P.W.2 who is the doctor deposed that the appellant has suffered permanent disability due to the shortening of left leg by 4"

In Islavath Nama v. S.A. Raheem 1987 (2) ALT 378 this court after thorough analysis and review of the awards given by various High Courts and also the Courts in England held that at least Rs. 20,000/- can be given towards non-pecuniary damages for pain and suffering and loss of amenities of life in the case of shortening of leg. It is also held in that case that there is no difference between rich and poor persons so far as non-pecuniary damages are concerned. It is also well settled that merely because the claimant has claimed less amount under one head, it does not prevent the Court from granting higher amount under that particular head subject to the condition that the over-all award does not exceed the amount claimed in the petition. Following the decision, I hold that Rs. 15,000/- will be the reasonable amount towards loss of pain and suffering, loss of amenities of life and expectation of life. Though the appellant is entitled to a further sum of Rs. 10,000/- under this head, he is entitled only to Rs .7,000/- together with 12% interest per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation as he claimed Rs. 25,000/- only in the petition.

The appeal is accordingly allowed with costs.