AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K. Govindarajulu, J.—Petitioner in MVC 3302/05 on the file of a Small Causes, SCCH-7, Bangalore is the Appellant in this appeal.
Case of the Petitioner is that on 24.04.05 at about 4.15 p.m. when he was riding his motor cycle bearing Registration No. KA05-EE-5050 at Jayanagar Bangalore, the driver of the Car bearing Registration No. KA05-P-4973 has driven the car rashly negligently and hit the two wheeler driver. It resulted in accident. For the pain agony suffered, Petitioner seek for a compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/-. The insurer of the vehicle/Respondent No. 2 has filed objections, deny the case pleaded, submit that if the Petitioner were to prove the accident, and that the Petitioner is entitled for compensation, it may be awarded with interest 6% p.a.
PW1 is examined. Exhibits P1 to P11 are marked. Policy is marked as exhibit Rule 1. The learned member of the tribunal has awarded Rs. 55,000/- as compensation. Aggrieved by the said order of fixing the compensation, the appeal is preferred.
Learned advocate Sri Vishwanath S Shettar for the Petitioner submits that the accident is admitted, actionable negligence is admitted. The injuries are reflected in Exhibit P6. Looking to the nature of injuries, including the loss of two teeth, the quantum of compensation awarded is meager. In addition to it the damage of vehicle is found, order of court is not proper in refusing to grant compensation in regard to repair of vehicle, so pray for orders. It is rebutted by the learned advocate Sri O Mahesh, and submits that the approach of the learned member of the Tribunal cannot be found fault as the doctor is not, examined. If really there was disability, the evidence of the doctor acquires importance so pray for dismissal of the appeal.
Material placed probablise that the date of accident, actionable negligence, coverage of the policy as on the date of the accident are not in dispute. The quantum awarded is only in-dispute. Wound certificate marked as exhibit P6 disclose a the following injuries:
a. Fracture of pubic Rami - Right
b. Laceration of left gluteal region
c. Lacerated wound 10cm x 4cm x muscle deep in left thigh upper 1 /3rd.
d. Contusion of left arm upper 1/3rd.
e. Contusion of right are (upper) inner aspect.
f. Abrassion over Right Maxilla,
g. Abrassion over right eye brow.
h. Abrassion over right lower chest.
i. Abrassion over the left parietal region.
j. Tow teeth lost in lower jaw.
The Petitioner has stated that he is final year BE student as on the date of accident, he claims that he has lost academic year, submit that he has lost career wise and professional wise. The doctor has certified that the injury to the Pubic Rami, is a grievous injury, in the wound certificate.
Petitioner in the course of evidence refer to the wound certificate and has stated that he has continued the treatment and spent Rs. 45000/- for medicines, treatment, nourishment etc. Also submit that for a period of one month he was in BEL hospital. No documents are produced to support the further treatment, no documents are produced to support the spending of Rs. 45,000/- but exhibit P9 photos reflect the claimant being on the bed with injuries. The accident is on 21.04.2005. The evidence is given on 2.4.2007. Petitioner has not placed any material to show the date or the year of the completion of the decree, efforts made by him to secure employment or has stated that he has become permanently disabled. So Court has to assess it is a case of conservative treatment. A similar subject of injury to Pubic Rami is considered in Pribhidas v. B.N. Renuka AIR 1983 Kar 186 So the compensation has to be worked out.
a) Pain and suffering: The claimant is treated conservatively there being a facture, there being hospitalisation a sum of Rs. 30,000/- is awarded.
b) Medical expenses: No documents are produced in regard to medical expense based on the injury certified a sum of Rs. 20,000/- is awarded.
c) Loss of earning and earning capacity: As narrated supra no evidence is forthcoming in regard to earning capacity, that is to say, whether he has completed his B.E. whether got an opportunity to work or lost the opportunity. Further the disability if any is also not substantiated, so a global compensation of Rs. 30,000 is awarded based on the finding of injury to the pubic Rami.
d) Diet, attendant expenditure, conveyance: Looking to the hospitalisation on account of the injury, under each of these heads Rs. 5,000/- is awarded. Totally a sum of Rs. 15,000/- is awarded. Another Rs. 15,000/- is awarded for repair of vehicle. Totally claimant is entitled to Rs. 1,10,000/- (Enhanced from Rs. 55,000/- to Rs. 1,10,000/-). It shall carry interest at 6% from the date of application till deposit. On deposit, the Petitioner is entitled to draw 80% of the money. Rest be kept in a nationalised bank initially for a period of 3 years authorising the Petitioner to draw interest periodically.
Appeal is allowed accordingly.