AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Hon''ble Dr. Justice K. Bhakthavatsala
Learned Counsel for the appellant/claimant submits that though the claimant sustained grievous injuries and resulted in permanent disablement to the extent of 42% with reference to left lower limb, the Tribunal has not awarded adequate compensation. He prays for enhancement of compensation.
Perused the LCR.
As per Ex. P5, the claimant sustained fracture of fibula lower 1/3rd of left leg and fracture of left ankle joint. He was treated as inpatient from 28.1.2007 to 11.2.2007 in Community Health Centre, Panchanahalli, Kadur Taluk. At Ex. P10 series, the claimant has produced medical bills in all amounting to Rs. 5,506.83 ps. In support of the case of the claimant, he has got himself examined as P.W.1 and got marked Exs. P1 to P13. He has also got examined Dr. S Rajanna as P.W.2. The record shows that the Insurance Company has examined Senior Executive (Claims) of the Insurance Company by name Sri Krishna Sheernali as R.W.1. But, in the Annexure to the judgment, name of R.W.1 is not mentioned. While examining R.W.1, the Insurance Company has got marked copy of insurance policy, wound certificate, IMV report, letter, R P cover and acknowledgment as Exs. R1 to R6. The Tribunal has answered issue No. 1 on the point of negligence in the affirmative. The insurance Company has admitted insurance of the vehicle. It is pleaded that it was a case of hit and run, but a belated complaint was filed implicating the motor cycle bearing registration No. KA-14-S-9152 and the MVI report of the vehicle showed no damage was caused to the vehicle. Therefore, the Insurance Company denied its liability. According to column No. 22 of the claim petition, it is pleaded that on 26.1.2007 at about 8.00 p.m., when the claimant was standing on the left side of the road and waiting for the bus near Kaimara bus stop, so as to go to his sister''s house at Panchanahalli motor cycle bearing registration No. KA-14-S-9152 came from Arasikere in a rash and negligent manner on the wrong side of the road and dashed against the claimant. As a result of which he fell down and sustained grievous injuries. He was admitted to a private Hospital at Panchanahalli and thereafter in Government Hospital at Panchanahalli and he was told that he sustained fracture of fibula lower 1/3rd left leg and fracture of left ankle joint. The left leg was operated and discharged with medical advice to come for periodical check-up. Notice was taken to respondent No. 2 by way of paper publication. In spite of service of, notice on respondent No. 2/owner of the motor cycle, he remained absent and he was set ex-parte before the Tribunal.
Ex. P1 is the certified copy of FIR. The complaint was lodged on 28.1.2007 at about 7.30 p.m. though the accident occurred on 26.1.2007 at 8.00 p.m. The complaint was lodged by the claimant himself against one Aravinda. The reasons for the delay in lodging complaint by the claimant, it is stated that he was suffering from pain and thereafter he has intimated his family members and he did not know about the procedure, but after he came to know about the procedure of lodging complaint, the complaint came to be lodged. Ex. P4 is the MVI report of the motor cycle. The Motor Vehicle Inspector did not notice any damage to the two wheeler. Ex. P5 is the wound certificate issued by the Karnataka Medical Department. According to that the claimant was examined by the Medical Officer on 28.1.2007 at about 10.00 a.m. Heavy burden lies on the claimant to prove the accident and involvement of the vehicle. The claimant has not examined any witness to prove the accident, but the Tribunal has answered issue No. 1 in the affirmative and awarded compensation of Rs. 1,34,000/- with costs and interest.
Ex. P13 is the X-ray film taken on 24.1.2009. The accident occurred in the year 2007. The X-ray taken immediately after the alleged accident has not been produced. The claimant has not taken steps to summon the medical reports. Except the discharge summary at Ex. P8 that the claimant sustained fracture of left fibula lower 1/3rd both sides and fracture of left ankle joint, there are no X-ray films. The Medical Officer, who treated the claimant in Community Health Centre at Panchanahalli has not been examined. The contention of the appellant that the Tribunal has not awarded adequate compensation is without any merit.
In the result, the Appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed. No costs.