AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B. Sreenivase Gowda, J.—This appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. Heard, the appeal is admitted and with the consent of learned counsel appearing for parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal.
As there is no dispute regarding injuries sustained by the claimant in a road traffic accident occurred on 6.11.2007 due to rash and negligent driving of the offending Autorickshaw bearing registration No. KA-05-C-4164 by its driver and liability of the insurer of the offending vehicle, the only point that arises for my consideration in the appeal is:
Whether quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?
After hearing the learned counsel appearing for parties and perusing the judgment and award of the Tribunal, I am of the view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable, it is on the lower side and hence it is required to be enhanced.
As per wound certificate Ex. P-7, the claimant has sustained fracture of right mandible and one simple injury. The injuries sustained by the claimant are also evident from discharge summary Ex. P-8, CT scan Ex. P-11 Exs. P-11 & 12 and supported by oral evidence of the claimant examined as PW-1. The claimant has not examined the doctor regarding disability suffered by him due to the said injuries.
Even though the claimant has produced 38 medical bills and supporting prescriptions amounting to Rs. 43,676, the Tribunal is not justified in awarding global compensation of Rs. 10,000/-. Therefore, I reassess the compensation awarded by the Tribunal and award the following compensation.
Considering the nature of injuries, a sum of Rs. 20,000/- is awarded towards ''pain and suffering''.
The claimant has produced medical bills for Rs. 43,676/-. She was treated as inpatient for a period of 5 days in a private hospital. Considering the nature of injuries and duration of treatment, a sum of '' Rs. 50,000/- is awarded towards ''medical and incidental expenses''.
The claimant claims to be doing flower vending business, but the same is not established by producing any documents. In the absence of proof of income, considering her age as 48 years, year of accident as 2007 and her avocation as coolie, her income could be assessed at Rs. 4,000/- per month. The nature of injuries suggest that she must have been under rest and treatment for a period of 3 months and therefore a sum of Rs. 12,000/- is awarded towards loss of income during laid up period''.
In the absence of evidence of doctor regarding disability and its impact on the future life and earning capacity of the claimant, she is not entitled for compensation under the head loss of amenities'' and "loss of future income".
Thus, the claimant is entitled for the following compensation:-
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed-in-part. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated herein above. The claimant is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs. 72,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation.
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the additional compensation amount together with interest within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. From which, 75% of the amount with proportionate interest is ordered to be invested in fixed deposit in the name of claimant in any Nationalised Bank/Scheduled Bank/Post Office for a period of 6 years and with a right of option to withdraw interest periodically. Remaining amount with proportionate interest is ordered to be released in favour of the claimant. The Tribunal while releasing 25% of the amount is also directed to issue the fixed deposit slips, so as to enable the claimant to withdraw the deposit amount on its maturity without approaching the Tribunal once again and the Bank is directed to release the fixed deposit amount without insisting for any further order from the Tribunal.
No order as to costs.