AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J.
This appeal by the claimant/appellant is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 29.10.2011 passed in M.V.C. 678/2008, by the 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge and Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chitradurga, (for short, ''the Tribunal'').
The Tribunal by the impugned judgment and award awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,97,700/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization, on account of the injuries sustained by the claimant in a road traffic accident.
It is the case of the appellant/claimant that, the quantum of compensation requires enhancement. Hence, he felt necessitated to present the instant appeal.
It is the case of the appellant that he was aged between 36 and 40 years and hale and healthy prior to the accident. He was doing milk vending business and also an agriculturist. Be that as it may. On 29.1.2008 at about 6.30 p.m., he being a pillion rider and his friend Kiran Kumar being the rider of the motor cycle bearing registration No. KA-16/D-5406 were going from Chitradurga towards their village Chikkabennur on extreme left side of NH-4 near Chikkabennur cross. At that time, the driver of the car bearing registration No. KA-04/MA-6059 drove the same in a rash and negligent manner with high speed and dashed against the motor cycle from its back side. Due to the impact, he fell down and sustained following injuries:
"1. Lacerated wound on temporal region measuring 6 cm.
Lacerated wound on frontal region measuring 5 cm.
Lacerated wound over root of the nose measuring 4 cm.
Cut wound over left cheek measuring 2 cm.
Cut wound over left chin and
Severe tenderness over lower 1/3rd of left leg."
Out of six injuries, injury Nos. 1 to 3 are grievous in nature and the other injuries are simple in nature. Further, it is his case that he sustained injuries to his teeth. He was admitted to hospital for 51 days on different dates. On clinical examination, his functional disability was assessed at 28%, out of which if 1/3rd is taken, it comes to 9.33% to the whole body. Further he spent considerable amount towards attendant charges, medical expenses and conveyance charges and he undergone mental pain and agony during treatment period and as per the advice of the Doctor, he took treatment for more than two months. Since the said disability affects his future career, he has to be compensated by reasonable amount under different heads on account of injuries sustained in the road traffic accident and as per the evidence of the Doctor, he requires reasonable amount towards future medical expenses.
Taking all these relevant factors into consideration, he filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act before the Tribunal, seeking compensation against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after considering the relevant material available on file and after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence and also the age, avocation and the year of accident, nature of injuries sustained by him and mental pain and agony suffered by him, has allowed the claim petition in part, awarding a sum of Rs. 1,97,700/- with interest @ 6% per annum, from the date of petition till the date of payment. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant is in appeal before this Court, seeking enhancement of compensation.
Learned counsel appearing for the appellant Sn. Spoorthy Hegde N., at the outset submitted that, the Tribunal grossly erred in not assessing the proper income of the claimant. He further submitted that the Tribunal erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards pain and suffering, conveyance, nourishment, food and attendant charges, loss of income during laid-up period, loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness in future life and that no compensation is awarded towards future medical expenses. He submitted that the appellant had undergone treatment for 51 days on different dates as inpatient and he examined the Doctor/CW-1 who after clinical and radiological examination opined that the claimant has suffered functional disability of 28%, 1/3rd of which comes to 9.33%. He was advised to take bed rest and follow-up treatment for more than three months and therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal may be modified by awarding reasonable compensation.
As against this, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 1/Insurer supported the impugned judgment and award stating that the same is passed after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and that the Tribunal has rightly awarded the compensation having regard to his age, avocation and year of accident. Hence, interference in the same is not called for.
After hearing learned Counsel appearing for both the parties and after careful perusal of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal including the original records placed before us, the only point that arises for our consideration in this appeal is:
"Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by Tribunal is just and reasonable?"
Occurrence of accident and the resultant injuries are not in dispute. As stated supra, it is the case of the appellant that he was aged 40 years, an agriculturist and also doing milk vending business. Having regard to his age and avocation, income of the appellant could be taken as Rs. 5,000/- per month. Further, it emerges from the records that he was admitted to hospital for 51 days as inpatient and he also examined the Doctor, who on clinical and radiological examination assessed the functional disability at 28%, out of which if 1/3rd is taken, it comes to 9.33%, which can be rounded off to 10%, to meet the ends of justice. We presume that he might have spent considerable amount during his hospitalization and also took treatment for at least three months and the said disability may continue throughout his life and it may come in the way of his milk vending business and also agricultural work. As per the evidence of the Doctor, he has to undergo one more operation. Hence, he has to be compensated reasonably on account of the injuries sustained by him. Hence, we deem it proper to award compensation as below:
The Tribunal has rightly awarded Rs. 88,000/- towards medical expenses, which does not call for interference.
In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part.
The impugned judgment and award dated 29.10.2011 passed in M.V.C. 678/2008, by the 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge and Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chitradurga, is hereby modified, awarding additional compensation of Rs. 1,15,300/- with interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization.
The first respondent/insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization, within 3 weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment and award.
Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,15,300/-, 50% of the same with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of the appellant in Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized/Scheduled/Grameena Bank for a period of five years and renewable for another five years, with liberty to him to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.
Remaining 50% with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant on deposit made by the first respondent.
Office to draw the award, accordingly.