AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P.D. Waingankar, J.—Both these appeals are arising out of the judgment and award dated 31.12.2009 in MVC No. 458/2007 on the file of the Fast Track Court-II at Koppal.
The claimant-Kum. Manjula sustained grievous injuries in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 12.04.2007 at about 5.45 p.m. at Koppal bus stand when NEKRTC bus bearing No. KA-37/F-178 ran over her foot on account of negligence of the driver of the bus. She filed a claim petition under Section 166 of M.V. Act. The Tribunal based on the evidence placed on record arrived at a conclusion that the accident and injury sustained by her were on account of negligence of the driver of the NEKRTC bus and accordingly on appreciation of the evidence the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,99,631/- as compensation to the claimant by the impugned judgment and award.
Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal both NEKRTC/Corporation filed M.F.A. No. 22720/2010 and claimant filed M.F.A. No. 21493/2010.
I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the claimant and Corporation. Perused the records and the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
Upon hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and upon perusal of the records, the only point that would arise for my determination is:
"Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?"
Ex. P4 is the wound certificate issued by District Hospital, Koppal, which discloses that in the said accident she sustained as many as four injuries out of that, injury No. 1 was crush injury to left foot for which she underwent traumatic amputation at the heel of the trasometatasal joint with deglooving of the heel pad. She was admitted at Om Sai Orthopaedic and Trauma Hospital on 12.04.2007 and discharged on 25.04.2007. But the Tribunal has not awarded any amount under the head injury pain and sufferings for the reasons best known to the Tribunal. Having regard to the number of injuries, nature of injuries and that she underwent traumatic amputation at the heel of the trasometatasal joint with deglooving of the heel pad, she has been awarded a sum of Rs. 40,000/- under the head injury pain and sufferings.
The claimant is unmarried girl aged about 28 years. Because of traumatic amputation at the heel of the trasometatasal joint with deglooving of the heel pad, she has to suffer throughout her life. Lot of inconvenience would be caused on account of amputation. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of amenities which appears to be on the lower side. Therefore, I am inclined to award a sum of Rs. 25,000/- towards discomfort and loss of future amenities as against Rs. 10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards incidental charges which appears to be just and reasonable. So also the amount awarded by the Tribunal under the head medical expenses amounting to Rs. 22,231/-.
Further, it is seen from the award that the Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of earnings during the period of treatment. On account of the accidental injury, the claimant must have been incapacitated from attending to her duties for a minimum period of three months and thereby she lost her earnings at the rate of Rs. 4,000/- per month. So an amount of Rs. 12,000/- is awarded under the head loss of earning during the period of treatment.
Though the claimant is unmarried girl, the Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of marriage prospects. Since she underwent traumatic amputation at the heel of the trasometatasal joint with deglooving of the heel pad which led to limping, her marriage prospects is definitely affected on account of the accidental injury. It is submitted that her marriage was fixed but on account of the accidental injury the marriage is broken. Be that as it may, the ends of justice will be met if an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- is awarded towards loss of marriage prospects.
The Tribunal taking into consideration 15% disability of the whole body and the income at the rate of Rs. 4,000/- per month and having regard to her age has rightly determined the compensation under the head future loss of income at Rs. 1,22,400/- and no interference is called for.
Thus, the claimant is held to be entitled for a total compensation as under:
Thus, the claimant is held to be entitled for a total compensation of Rs. 3,31,631/- together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum as against Rs. 1,99,631/- awarded by the Tribunal. There shall be an enhancement of Rs. 1,32,000/-. Accordingly, I pass the following order.
M.F.A. No. 22720/2010 filed by the Corporation is hereby dismissed.
M.F.A. No. 21493/2010 is partly allowed. The judgment and award dated 31.12.2009 in MVC No. 458/2007 on the file of the Fast Track Court-II at Koppal, stands modified. The claimant is held to be entitled for an enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,32,000/- over and above the compensation awarded by the Tribunal together with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realisation.
The Corporation is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation together with interest thereon within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.
In the event of deposit, entire compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellant-claimant.
The amount in deposit in by the Corporation in M.F.A. No. 22720/2010 shall be transmitted to the Tribunal.