Sri. Murugan vs Shri. G. Ramamurthy and Others

K. Sreedhar Rao, J.—Petitioner in M.V.C. No. 288 of 1995 sustained fracture of right ankle, in the motor vehicle accident. Fracture is mal-united. Medical Board has given an opinion that there is no possibility or chance of reunion. The total body disability is assessed at 30%.

It is said that the Petitioner was a cleaner in the Lorry. Father of the Petitioner was the driver of the Lorry in question. Owner-R.W.1 has disputed the fact that the Petitioner was employed as a cleaner in the Lorry. Petitioner on the other hand, has testified to the fact that he was employed as a cleaner. There was no evidence to show that somebody else was appointed as a cleaner in the Lorry during the journey. If the driver of the lorry bona-fidely engages a cleaner in the course of journey, that appointment made by the driver-agent of the owner, shall be a valid appointment and binding on the owner. In that view, the version of the Petitioner that he was working as a cleaner in the Lorry cannot be disbelieved. The fact that the father is the driver cannot be a reason to disbelieve that his son was employed as a cleaner. The income of the Petitioner is to be assessed at Rs. 1,500/- per month. Accident occurred in the year 1994.

On re-examination of the facts and evidence, the Petitioner is entitled to Rs. 30,000/- for pain and agony, Rs. 10,000/- towards Medical expenses and incidental charges relating to treatment, Rs. 10,000/- for loss of amenities on account of disability, Rs. 32,400/- (150 X 12 X 18) for loss of future income on account of disability, Rs. 6,000/- for loss of income during laid up period. In all, the Petitioner is entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 88,400/- as against Rs. 32,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation carries interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till payment.

The insurer has not produced the Policy and has not let in any evidence to show that insurer has only a limited liability under the Act Policy. In the view, the entire compensation is payable by the insurer to the Petitioner-claimant.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The Petitioner is awarded a total compensation of Rs. 88,400/- as against Rs. 32,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced compensation carries interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till payment.