Laxmawwa and Others vs Sunil and Others

P.S. Dinesh Kumar, J.—Though these matters are listed for admission, with consent of learned Counsel appearing for both the parties, the matters are taken up for final disposal.

All these appeals by the claimants have stemmed out of a common Judgment and Awards dated 28.3.2008 in MVCs No. 2425/2002, 2467/2002, 2427/2002, 2426/2002 & 2428/2002, respectively, on the file of Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) and Member, Addl. MACT., Ramdurg.

Heard Sri Santosh B. Malgoudar, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants, Sri R.R. Mane, learned Counsel for Insurer - respondent No. 2 and Ms. Preeti Shashank, learned Counsel for Insurer -respondent No. 4.

All claimants were travelling in a Tempo, which met with an accident, when a Truck bearing No. AP-22/U-1313 driven in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the Tempo. All claimants sustained injuries and presented their respective claim petitions. Petitions were resisted by the respondents. In all 9 witnesses were examined in MVC No. 2428/2002 and 38 exhibits marked. One witness was examined on behalf of the respondents and 5 exhibits Exs. D1 to D5 marked. In MVC No. 2467/2002, two witnesses were examined and 12 documents marked. On behalf of the respondents, no witness was examined and no document was marked.

On consideration of the material on record, the Tribunal has awarded different amounts of compensation to the claimants. Petitions against the Insurer of the offending vehicle, namely the Truck were dismissed on the premise that the registration number of the Truck did not match with the number mentioned in the Insurance Policy. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the appellants that the Tribunal erred in absolving the Insurer of the Truck on an erroneous assumption that the vehicle number did not match. He submitted that the Truck was initially registered in Karnataka with registration No. KA-16/395. Upon being transferred to Andhra Pradesh, it was re-numbered as AP-22/U-1313. Truck number is mentioned as KA-16/395 in the Insurance Policy. Therefore, as on the date of accident, the lorry registered in Andhra Pradesh continued to have the Insurance coverage in which the registration number of Karnataka is mentioned. This fact is not controverted by the learned Counsel for the Insurer of the Truck.

With regard to the quantum of compensation, learned Counsel for the appellants has adverted to the relevant portions of the Judgment, in each case and submitted that quantum of compensation is inadequate and prayed for enhancement.

Per contra, learned Counsel for the Insurer of the Truck supporting the judgment of the Tribunal sought for dismissal of these appeals.

Tribunal has absolved the Insurer of Truck on the ground that the premium was collected in respect of vehicle No. KA-16/395 and the registration number of the offending vehicle is AP-22/U-1313. It is the case of appellants that the registration number was changed as the offending vehicle was re-registered in the State of Andhra Pradesh. There is no dispute with regard to payment of premium and therefore a mere change in the registration number cannot be a ground for absolving the Insurer. Learned Counsel for the Insurer has not disputed that the registration number of the offending vehicle was changed as it was initially registered in Karnataka and subsequently in Andhra Pradesh. Therefore, in my considered view, the finding of the Tribunal that Insurer is not liable to indemnify is perverse and not sustainable. Consequently, Insurer is held liable to indemnify the owner.

Having held that the second respondent -Insurer of the Truck is liable to satisfy the award, the question that remains for consideration is the quantum of compensation.

Re. MFA No. 21551/2009: In this case, claimant has suffered fracture of lower 1/3rd radius of left wrist and fracture of lateral condyle of tibia of right knee. He was treated as an inpatient for 21 days and underwent surgery. Doctor has assessed the whole body disability at 20%.

On consideration of the material on record, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,22,000/- towards loss of disability by taking Rs. 3,000/- per month as the income and disability factor at 20%. Hospital charges of Rs. 18,000/- and medical expenses of Rs. 5,000/- have been awarded in full. Rs. 10,000/- has been awarded towards loss of amenities. At para 19 of the Judgment, the Tribunal has meticulously assessed the material on record and awarded compensation under various heads. Keeping the date of accident in mind, in my view, compensation awarded on all these heads are just and adequate.

However, no compensation is awarded towards loss of income during laid-up period. Injuries suffered may have prevented the claimant from working for 5 to 6 months. Accordingly, a global sum of Rs. 20,000/- is awarded towards loss of income during laid-up period''.

Re. MFA No. 21552/2009 & MFA No. 21554/2009:

"In these two cases, the injured has suffered fracture of 10th rib. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 18,000/- and Rs. 16,000/- respectively."

Re. MFA No. 21553/2009:

"In this case, injured - claimant has suffered cut lacerated wound on upper lip, loss of teeth on right upper incisor and other minor injuries. She was an inpatient for 6 days. A compensation of Rs. 16,000/- has been awarded."

Re. MFA No. 21555/2009:

"Claimant in this case has suffered cut lacerated wound on front right knee and cut lacerated wound on left knee and contusion on lateral aspect of right arm and abrasion on forehead and he has been awarded a compensation of Rs. 25,000/-."

The Tribunal while awarding compensation in each of the above cases has awarded compensation after a careful consideration of injuries sustained which is conspicuous in the detailed description given in each case. In MFAs No. 21552, 21553, 21554 & 21555/2009, the compensation awarded is just and adequate and do not call any interference.

In the result, I pass the following:--

"ORDER

(i) MFA No. 21551/2009 is allowed in part and an enhanced compensation of Rs. 20,000/- is awarded;

(ii) Second respondent - Insurer of Truck is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 20,000/- with 6% interest p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order;

(iii) The claimant in MFA No. 21551/2009 is permitted to withdraw the amount on its deposit.

(iv) Appeals in MFAs No. 21552/2009, 21553/2009, 21554/2009 & 21555/2009 are dismissed."

No costs.