AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
H.S. Kempanna, J.—Though this matter is listed for admission.; with the consent of the learned Counsel for the respective parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
This appeal is by the claimant seeking for enhancement of compensation in respect of injuries which he has sustained in a motor accident.
The brief facts of the case are:
The Appellant-claimant filed claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation in respect of bodily injuries, which he sustained in a motor accident trial took place on 07.09.2006 at about 4.20 p.m., near J.M.F.C. Court at Hosadurga involving motor cycle bearing registration. No. KA-16/J-4574 owned by the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and insured with the third Respondent at the relevant point of time in the impugned accident, he sustained fracture to his Metatarsal bone of his left foot for which he took: treatment by spending huge money, Despite the same, he is not completely cured of the injuries, Hence, he is unable to carry on his avocation as a. coolie, which has resulted in loss of income to him. Accordingly, be sought for grant of compensation.
After service of notice the second Respondent insurer remained absent, Hence, he was placed exparte, The first and third Respondent-owner and the insurer'' appeared before the Tribunal through their counsel However, the first Respondent-owner did not choose to file any objection. The third Respondent filed his objections and contended that the accident in question did not take place on account of the fault of the rider of the motor cycle. On the oilier hand it is due to the negligence of the claimant himself. They also contended that they are not liable to pay any compensation as the rider did not possess valid and effective driving licence. Accordingly; they sought for dismissal of the petition.
The Tribunal on considering the evidence and documents on record field that the accident in question has taken place due to fault of the rider of the motor cycle and accordingly, claimant has established actionable negligence. Further, the Tribunal looking to the evidence of the claimant and the doctor who had examined him and the documents placed on record has awarded a sum of Rs. 47,440/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realisation under various heads, it further saddled the liability of payment of compensation on the third Respondent-insurer.
The Appellant-claimant being aggrieved of the quantum of compensation is in appeal before this Court.
Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant submitted that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding commensurate compensation to the claimant under various heads Hence, a case for enhancement is made out
Per contra. Learned Counsel appearing for the contesting insurer contended that the compensation awarded itself is exorbitant and therefore, it does not call for any interference. Accordingly, sought for dismissal of the petition,
Taking the rival submissions into consideration arises for my consideration is:
Whether the Appellant claimant has made out a case for enhancement?
As the accident in question resulting in injuries to the claimant due to the fault, of the rider of the offending motor cycle is not disputed. The question of considering actionable negligence does not arise as the same is also accepted. The Tribunal having regard to the injuries sustained and the medical evidence on. record has awarded a sum. of Rs. 47,440/- with interest at 6% per annum from, the date at petition till realisation. The material on record, reveals that the claimant has substring fracture of only one metatarsal bone of his left foot. The doctor PW2 who has examined him has stated that be has disability to an extent of 20% to left lower limb, However, it may be reduced to 15%. But he has not stated what would be the permanent disability that the claimant would suffer on account of the injuries sustained. Without dwelling much on all these aspects as it is undisputed that the claimant sustained only fracture of metatarsal bone of his left foot the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under various heads. appears to be just and proper and does not call for any modification. Accordingly, appeal has to fail
In the result for the foregoing reasons I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
Appeal is dismissed.