Laxman Yadav vs Bharatlal Yadav

Being aggrieved by the award passed by the 4th Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) (in short ‘Tribunal’) dated 26.08.2017 in Claim Case No.399/2016, this appeal has been preferred by the appellant/claimant. The learned Tribunal in its order has awarded compensation of Rs.95,200/- in favour of the appellant/claimant. Hence, this appeal has been preferred for enhancement.

Facts of the case in brief is that on 07.04.2016, appellant/claimant namely Laxman Yadav was coming to Akaltara with his friend Bihari Yadav on a motorcycle. When they reached near village Parsahi, respondent No.1 – Bharatlal Yadav who was driving a trailer bearing registration No.CG-11-AB-3110 (ofending vehicle) in a rash and negligent manner dashed the appellant and his friend Bihari Yadav due to which the appellant and his friend sustained grievous injuries. The appellant and his friend both were admitted in Mundra Hospital, Bilaspur for treatment.

Thereafter, the appellant/claimant fled a claim petition before the Claims Tribunal under Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 claiming compensation of Rs.9,20,000/-. After recording of the evidence and after appreciating the evidence available on record, the Tribunal awarded total compensation amount of Rs.95,200/-. Hence, this appeal has been preferred by the appellant/claimant for enhancement of the compensation amount.

Respondent No.1 is the driver of the ofending vehicle, respondent No.2 is the owner of the ofending vehicle and respondent No.3 is the insurer of the ofending vehicle.

Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the appellant has sufered grievous injuries on his body. The appellant was also admitted in the hospital for about 5-6 days. Despite the learned Tribunal has awarded very meager amount towards the head of pain and sufering and on the other heads also, which should be suitably enhanced.

Learned Counsel appearing for respondent No.3/Insurance Company opposed the arguments advanced by learned Counsel for the appellant. He further submitted that as per the evidence available on record, the learned Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation in favour of the appellant.

I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the award passed by the Claim Tribunal.

It is not in dispute that the appellant was admitted in the hospital on 07.04.2016 and thereafter, discharged on 12.04.2016 from the Mundra Hospital, Bilaspur. Appellant sufered chip fracture in patela and fracture in frst and second bone of the foot and his frst operation was conducted on 07.04.2016. Second operation was conducted on 10.04.2016 in which rod was inserted in the foot palm of the appellant.

While assessing the compensation, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/- only towards pain and sufering which seems to be on very lower side. Looking to the injuries sustained by the appellant and further considering the fact that the appellant has undergone two operations, he shall have to bear this trauma for life long, therefore, it would be appropriate to award Rs.50,000/- towards pain and sufering instead of Rs.10,000/-. Ordered accordingly.

The Tribunal has granted Rs.5,000/- in the head of future treatment expenses which also appears to be on lower side. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, it would be appropriate to enhance the amount in this head also. Thus, the amount is enhanced to Rs.10,000/- instead of Rs.5,000/- towards future treatment expenses. Ordered accordingly.

Considering the injuries sustained by the appellant, further considering the fact that he has also undergone two operations, it can be presumed that he would not be able to work for about four months and he would sufer loss of income for said four months period. As the Tribunal has assessed monthly income of the appellant Rs.5,000/-, it would be appropriate to grant Rs.20,000/- (5,000 x 4) to the appellant towards loss of income for period of four months.

The Tribunal has also awarded Rs.5,000/- towards nutritious/special diet which seems to be low and the said is enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,000/- towards transportation expenses and the same does not require interference. The Tribunal has also not awarded any amount towards expenses of attendant. Considering the fact that the appellant has sufered about four months due to injuries, and it appears that in said period he would have needed attendant, therefore, it would be appropriate to award Rs.5,000/- to the appellant towards expenses of attendant. Ordered accordingly. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.60,200/- towards medical expenses which is based on the bills submitted by the appellant and the same does not require any interference.

For the foregoing reasons, amount of compensation to be awarded to the appellant requires re-computation as under:

S.No.

Conventional Heads

Amount (in Rs.)

1.

Medical expenses

60,200/-

2.

loss of income of period of 4 months (5,000 x4)

20,000/-

3.

Towards pain and sufering

50,000/-

4.

Towards nutritious/special diet

10,000/-

5.

Towards transportation expenses

5,000/-

6.

Towards future treatment

10,000/-

7.

Towards attendant charge

5,000/-

Total compensation amount

Rs.1,60,200/-

Now, the appellant/claimant is entitled for total sum of Rs.1,60,200/- (One lac sixty thousand and two hundred) as compensation instead of Rs.95,200/- as awarded by Claims Tribunal along with interest of 8.5% per annum from the date of submission of the claim petition before the Tribunal i.e. 12.07.2016 till realisation. Ordered accordingly.

Consequently, the instant appeal is allowed in part and the impugned award is modifed to the extent indicated above. Rest of the impugned award shall remain intact.