AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
A.N. Venugopala Gowda, J.—This is a claimant''s appeal. The appellant sustained injuries in Motor Vehicle accident on 9.1.2007. She took treatment in the hospital. Having noticed the loss caused, both under pecuniary and non non-pecuniary heads, she filed a claim petition u/s 166 of Motor Vehicle Act 1988, against the respondents claiming a compensation of Rs. 5,75,000/-. Said petition was contested by respondents. Based on the pleadings of the parties, tribunal framed 3 issues. Petitioner deposed as PW1. Dr. Kiran M.S. was examined as PW2. Exs. P1 to P12 were marked. Respondents produced the Insurance Policy which was marked by consent as Ex.R1. No other evidence was led by the respondents. Appreciating the evidence on record, tribunal held that, the accident has taken place on 9.1.2007 on account of actionable negligence on the part of the driver of auto rickshaw and that, claimant sustained injuries and she is entitled for compensation. It passed an award of Rs. 53,000/-. Dissatisfied with the amount awarded and for awarding just compensation by re-assessing the evidence, she has preferred this appeal. Finding of Tribunal on Point No. 1 has attained finality. Respondents have accepted the award. There is no appeal or cross-objection by them.
I have heard learned Counsel on both the sides and perused the record.
Learned Counsel for the appellant contended that, tribunal has not appreciated the evidence with regard to the injuries and the consequential of loss, in the proper prospective and hence has failed to award just compensation. Learned Counsel took me through the oral and documentary evidence on record and submitted that the impugned award is meager. On the other hand, learned Counsel for 2nd respondent/Insurance Company submitted that, the tribunal has considered the evidence in proper perspective and has passed the award for Rs. 53,000/-, which is just compensation. According to the learned Counsel this is not a case where any enhanced compensation is required to be awarded. Learned Counsel made submissions in support of the findings and conclusion of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.
In view of the rival contentions and the record, the point for consideration is;
Whether compensation awarded by the tribunal is just or any increase is called for?
Accident has been established. Appellant took treatment for the injuries. Ex. P7 is the wound certificate. She was an in patient and the discharge summary is at P6. The treatment obtained is evidenced from the prescriptions and medical bills which are at P8. PW 2 has deposed that the petitioner was admitted to Panacea Hospital on 9.1.2007 with the history of road traffic accident. On examination he found the following injuries;
a) Blunt injury over chest with contusion, X-ray shows fracture of 9th rib left side.
b) Blunt injury with pain over lumbar region, X-ray shows anterior spinal ligament, calcification for 7 9 to T12, suggestions, contused laceration of ligament.
According to him, opinion of the orthopaedician Dr. Umesh Shetty was taken and treated conservatively and discharged on 11.1.2007 with advice to take follow up treatment. Again he examined the patient along with Orthopaedician Dr. Umesh Shetty on 13.9.2007, Check X-ray for spine shows persisted ligament calcification. He has opined that, the claimant has permanent disability of 20% to her back and 7% to the whole body. In view of the said evidence, the tribunal has awarded compensation as follows:
Pain and Sufferings Rs. 15,000/- Medical expenses and Incidental charges Rs. 25,000/- Loss of amenities Rs. 10,000/- Loss of income during treatment period Rs. 3,000/- ----------------- Total Rs. 53,000/- -----------------
Considering the nature of injuries sustained and the appellant being a middle aged lady, on account of pain, shock and suffering, it would be just to award a further sum of Rs. 5,000/- there under.
Ex.P8 is prescriptions and medical bills. Tribunal has observed that, there is no receipt for payment of hospital bill of Rs. 31,040/-. The document produced at Ex.P8 is dated 11.01.2007 under I.P. No. 2308. The name of the patient is Nirmala D. Date of admission is 9.1.2007 and date of discharge is 11.1.2007. It is a detailed bill for the treatment obtained in the hospital. The bill itself contains the sign and signature of the hospital, which is nothing but the bill cum receipt. Said aspect has not been correctly noticed by the tribunal and hence it has disallowed the amount thereunder. The said bill is not a disputed document. Considering the fact that, the appellant was an inpatient for 3 days, must have taken nourished diet and incurred expenditure towards transportation of herself as well as an attendant. Hence, it would meet the ends of justice, if a further sum of Rs. 16,000/- is awarded under the head ''medical expenses and related expenses'' which includes the aforesaid bill for Rs. 31,040/-.
The amount awarded as loss of income during treatment period at Rs. 3,000/- p.m. is not just. As already noticed the appellant was a middle aged lady of 38 years. She must have suffered shock and must have taken sufficient long time to attend the duty and hence it would be just award a further sum of Rs. 3,000/- there under.
The tribunal has not awarded any sum under the head, Moss of future income''. Though appellant has produced Ex.P10 - a termination letter, nothing is stated in her evidence regarding her termination from service. Mere production and marking of Ex.P10 is not proof. Ex. P10 has also not been proved by examining the employer. Hence there is no loss of future income, since she is employed and is salaried person.
Considering the nature of injuries sustained and partial permanent disability, there is loss of amenities, which would affect the future happiness. Hence it would be reasonable to award a further sum of Rs. 15,000/-, also keeping in view the fact that, no amount has been awarded under the head loss of future income.
In the result, the appeal is allowed in part. In modification of the judgment and award passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, the appellant is held entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs. 39,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. Respondent/Insurance Company is granted 3 months time from today for depositing of the amount. No costs.
Registry to draw the modified award.