AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J.—1. This appeal by the claimant is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 18.11.2014 passed in MVC No. 253/2011 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, CJM, Addl. MACT, Ramanagara, (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short), for enhancement of compensation.
The Tribunal by its judgment and award has awarded a compensation of Rs. 9,06,329/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit, as against the claim made by the appellant, on account of the grievous injuries sustained by the claimant in the road traffic accident.
Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant has presented this appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation.
The brief facts of the case are as follows;
The appellant was aged about 18 years, hale and healthy possessing PUC and also doing business, earning a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month. He met with an accident on 21.02.2011 at about 12.45 p.m., when he was proceeding on a Honda Deo vehicle bearing Registration No. KA-42-J-7080 as a pillion rider along with rider Darshan on Channapatna - Sathnoor Road in front of Vadakehosahalli Naganna''s house at Kanakanagar, on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of the private bus bearing registration No. KA-11-A-1854. Due to the impact, he fell down and sustained crush injury on his right leg, degloving injury and fracture of both bones of right leg, on account of which he undergone treatment for a period of three months on different dates as an inpatient and undergone surgeries. It is the case of the appellant that he has spent considerable amount towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges and suffered mental pain and agony during the treatment period and taken bed rest for a period of 9 months as advised by the doctor. He also suffered discomfort and unhappiness in his life and has to endure the same through out his life because of the injuries sustained on account of road traffic accident and it affects his marriage prospects and he has lost his education and not in a position to continue the business. Taking all these aspects into consideration, he filed a claim petition under Section 166 of M.V. Act against the respondents. The said matter had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after appreciation of oral and documentary evidence and other relevant documents available on record, taking into consideration the age, avocation, nature of injuries sustained and duration of treatment he undergone, has allowed the petition in part and awarded a sum of Rs. 9,06,329/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant has presented this appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation.
The learned counsel for the appellant at the outset submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards ''pain and suffering'', loss of income during laid up period'', loss of amenities, conveyance, nourishing food, attendant charges, discomfort and unhappiness and disability'', loss of future income and loss of marriage prospects. To substantiate the same, the appellant examined himself as PW-1 and the doctor as PW-2. After clinical and radiological examination, the doctor has assessed permanent disability to an extent of 90% to the limb and 50% to the whole body. It affects his marriage prospects also and it requires to be enhanced by some reasonable amount. The Tribunal also erred in assessing the income of the appellant at only Rs. 4,000/- per month which is on lower side and the same may be re-assessed by modifying the impugned judgment and award. These aspects of the matters have not been taken into consideration.
Further submission of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the accident is of the year 2011 and the rate of interest on the compensation may be awarded at least at 9% per annum.
As against this, learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent inter-alia contended that the Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is after due consideration of oral and documentary evidence and other relevant material available on record and taking into consideration the age, avocation, year of accident and nature of injuries. The Tribunal has rightly awarded the compensation of Rs. 9,06,329/- with interest at 6% per annum. Hence, it does not call for interference.
After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for consideration is:
"Whether the quantum of compensation is inadequate or required for enhancement?"
It is not in dispute that the appellant was aged about 18 years, hale and healthy and possessing PUC qualification and also doing business, earning a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month. He met with an accident on 21.02.2011 at about 12.45 p.m., and sustained crush injury on his right leg, degloving injury and fracture of both bones of right leg, on account of which he undergone treatment for a period of three months on different dates as an inpatient and undergone surgeries and might have taken bed rest for 9 months as advised by the doctor. He has spent considerable amount towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges. The doctor has assessed permanent disability to an extent of 90% to the limb and 50% to the whole body. He also suffered discomfort and unhappiness in his life and has to endure the same through out his life because of the injuries sustained on account of road traffic accident and it affects his marriage prospects and he has lost his education and not in a position to do his business. Taking into consideration all these aspects, we are of the view that the same has to be compensated by awarding reasonable compensation.
Having regard to the age, avocation, year of the accident, we can safely reassess the income of the deceased at Rs. 6,000/- per month as against Rs. 4,000/- per month assessed by the Tribunal, to meet the ends of justice. Taking into consideration the injuries sustained and disability caused, we can safely assess the permanent disability at 30% to the whole body. Multiplier applicable to his age is 16. Therefore, the loss of future income'' comes to Rs. 3,88,800/- (Rs. 6,000/-x12x18x30/100) as against Rs. 2,16,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The compensation awarded towards ''pain and suffering'' is on the lower side and we award a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- as against Rs. 45,000/-, a sum of Rs. 54,000/- (Rs. 6,000 x 9 months) towards loss of income during laid up period'' as against Rs. 24,000/-, a sum of Rs. 75,000/- towards loss of amenities'' as against Rs. 50,000/-, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- is awarded towards ''Conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges'' as against Rs. 20,000/-, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of Marriage Prospects'' as against Rs. 15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The compensation of Rs. 5,06,329/- awarded by the Tribunal towards ''medical expenses'' is as per medical bills and the same is just and proper. The compensation of Rs. 50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards ''future medical expenses'' is also just and proper. It does not call for interference.
In all, the appellant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs. 13,24,129/- as against Rs. 9,06,329/- and the break- up is as follows:
The enhanced compensation comes to Rs. 4,17,800/-.
As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court, we deem it fit to award 9% interest per annum on enhanced compensation from the date of petition till realization.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal dated 18.11.2014 passed in MVC No. 253/2011 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, CJM, Addl. MACT, Ramanagara is hereby modified by awarding additional compensation of Rs. 4,17,800/- with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.
The 2nd respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 4,17,800/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realisation, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Out of the enhanced compensation, Rs. 3,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized or Scheduled Grameena Bank, in the name of the appellant for a period of ten years and renewable for ten years, with liberty to withdraw the interest accrued on it periodically.
The remaining amount of Rs. 1,17,800/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant immediately, on deposit by the Insurer.
Draw the award, accordingly.