AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Admit.
This is a claimant''s appeal seeking enhancement of compensation against the impugned judgment and award dated 06th June 2006 passed in MVC No. 524/2000 on the file of the Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn) and CJM & MACT, Mandya (''Tribunal'' for short).
The Tribunal, by its judgment and award, has awarded a sum of Rs. 4,63,870/- (wrongly shown as Rs. 4,63,860/- in the order portion of the judgment of Tribunal) with interest at the rate of 8% p.a., as against the claim of appellant for Rs. 54,29,000/- on account of the injuries sustained by him in a road traffic accident. Being aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by she Tribunal, the appellant has presented this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
The brief facts of the case are:
The appellant claims to be aged about 27 years as on the date of accident and working as a driver of heavy vehicle, earning a sum of Rs. 4,000/- per month excluding daily Batta. That he was hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That on 29.05.2000 at about 2.10 a.m., the appellant along with his relatives, was coming from Mysore to Kunigal via. Mysore-Bangalore Main Road, to attend a funeral ceremony, in a car bearing registration No. KA 02/4546. When the car reached Yeliyur the driver of the car drove the same at high speed, in a rash and negligent manner, endangering human life, so also a lorry bearing registration No. KA-11/E-5121, which was coming from the opposite direction. When the driver of the lorry came to the extreme right side of the road to overtake another vehicle, both the vehicles collided, resulting in the accident. On account of the same, the appellant sustained mild cerebral edema, fracture of mandible, fracture of maxilla, bilateral dislocation of both hip joints and other injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to Government Hospital at Mandya and later, to NIMHANS at Bangalore, where he took treatment as inpatient from 30.05.2000 to 30.06.2000. The doctor has assessed the disability at 62% to the left lower limb, 51% to the right lower limb and 30% permanent disability towards face and 40% disability in respect of whole body. It is the case of the appellant that he has spent reasonable amount of money towards medical expenses, conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges. He has undergone treatment for a period of 32 days and undergone four surgeries. On account of the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident, he filed a claim petition u/s 166 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the respondents claiming compensation of Rs. 54,29,000/-.
The said claim petition had come up before the Tribunal on 06th June 2006. The Tribunal on assessment of oral and documentary evidence and other material available on file, taking into consideration age and avocation of the appellant, has allowed the claim petition in part and awarded compensation of Rs. 4,63,870/- with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. The appellant being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, has presented this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
We have heard learned counsel for appellant and learned counsel for respondents 2 & 4 -- Insurance Companies.
The learned counsel for the appellant at the outset submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding adequate compensation towards loss of income during laid up period, loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness, loss of future income and marriage prospects and not awarding any compensation towards future medical expenses, without considering the fact that the doctor has assessed the disability to the right lower limb at 51%, left lower limb at 62% and 30% permanent disability for his face and 40% in respect of the whole body. That he has undergone four surgeries and also admitted in the hospital as inpatient for more than 30 days. These aspects of the matter have not been considered, nor appreciated nor awarded just and reasonable compensation. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified.
As against this, the learned counsel for the insurer inter alia contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and it does not call for interference. However, they fairly submitted that the compensation under some of the heads require reconsideration, as submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant and therefore, the same may be considered in accordance with law.
After careful consideration of the submissions made by learned counsel for both parties, the only point that arise for our consideration is as to
Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?
On perusal of the material on record and impugned judgment & award, it emerges that, the Tribunal has rightly awarded just and reasonable compensation towards pain and sufferings, medical expenses, conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges. Therefore, the same does not call for interference.
However, the Tribunal, has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards loss of income during laid up period, loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness; loss of marriage prospects and it has not awarded any compensation towards future medical expenses. It is not in dispute that the appellant was aged about 27 years as on the date of accident and was a driver by occupation, earning an income of Rs. 4,000/- per month. The accident took place in the year 2000. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, we presume that he must have undergone treatment for a period of three months. The doctor has assessed the disability to the right lower limb at 51% & left lower limb at 62%, 30% permanent disability towards face and 40% in respect of the whole body. The appellant has to undergo discomfort and unhappiness during the rest of his life. On account of the injuries sustained on his face and other parts, his marriage prospects would be affected to some extent. He has to undergo another surgery for hips replacement. Considering the tentative cost of surgery, he has to spend reasonable amount of money for surgery and medicines. These aspects of the matter have not been considered, nor appreciated by the Tribunal while awarding the compensation. Considering all these aspects, we deem it fit to award a sum of Rs. 12,000/-towards loss of income during laid up period for a period of 3 months at the rate of Rs. 4,000/- p.m.; a sum of Rs. 40.000/- towards loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness; a sum of Rs. 20,000/- towards loss of marriage prospects and a sum of Rs. 50,000/- towards future medical expenses.
Further, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding just and reasonable compensation towards loss of future income. The appellant was aged about 27 years as on the date of accident; he was young and energetic, being a driver of a heavy vehicle. Therefore, the Tribunal is not justified in assessing the income of the appellant at Rs. 3,000/- p.m. Having regard to the age, avocation of the appellant and the date of accident, we can safely re-assess the income of the appellant at a sum of Rs. 4,000/- per month. The doctor has assessed the disability at 40% in respect of the whole body; the same is just and proper. The appropriate multiplier applicable is ''17'' in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, Taking all these facts into consideration, we redetermine the compensation towards loss of future income at a sum of Rs. 3,26,400/- [ Rs. 4,000/ x 12 x 17X40/100].
In the light of the facts and circumstances as stated above, the appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award passed on 06th June 2006 in MVC.524/2000 on the file of the Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn) and CJM &, MACT Mandya, is hereby modified and the break up is as under:
(i)
Pain and sufferings :
Rs. 70,000/-
(ii)
Medical expenses, conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges :
Rs. 1,35,070/-
(iii)
Loss of income during laid up period: [ Rs. 4,000/- x 3]
Rs. 12,000/-
(iv)
Loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness :
Rs. 40,000/-
(v)
Loss of future income :[ Rs. 4,000/- x 12 x 17 x 40/100]
Rs. 3,26,400/-
(vi)
loss of marriage prospects :
Rs. 20,000/-
(vii)
Future medical expenses :
Rs. 50,000/-
TOTAL
Rs. 6,53,470/-
Thus, the appellant is entitled to total compensation of Rs. 6,53,470/- as against the compensation of Rs. 4,63,870/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.
Respondent No. 2. - Insurance company is The respondents 2 & 4 - Insurers are directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,89,600/-with interest at 6% p.a. within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment and award.
Respondent No. 2
On such deposit by the Insurance companies, a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be kept in Fixed Deposit in the name of the appellant in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, for a period of five years, renewable by another five years, with permission for him to withdraw interest periodically.
The remaining amount of Rs. 39,600/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favor of appellant immediately.
Office is directed to draw the award accordingly.