Abdul Reheman vs Ashraf and Others

B. Manohar, J.—Appellant is the claimant, being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in MVC No. 465/2010 by Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Udupi (hereinafter referred to as ''the Tribunal'' for short) by its judgment and award dated 14-8-2012, has filed this appeal seeking for enhancement of compensation.

It is the case of the claimant that, on 7-5-2010 while he was proceeding on a motorbike bearing registration No. KA-20/U-7196, as a pillion rider, due to the rash and negligent riding of the motorbike, near Katapadi, the rider lost control over the vehicle, as a result of which, it overturned. In view of that, the claimant fell down and sustained grievous injuries to legs, hands and other parts of the body. Immediately after the accident, he was shifted to Hi-tech Medicare hospital and he was treated there as inpatient from 7-5-2010 to 15-5-2010. He had undergone surgery for the fracture of tibia and implants were also inserted. He claimed that, prior to the accident he was working as a Plumber and earning Rs. 250/- per day. In view of the accident, he is unable to do the work of a Plumber and sought for compensation of Rs. 6,00,000/-.

Though the first respondent/rider of the offending motorbike was served with notice, he remained unrepresented. The second respondent/Insurance Company filed the written statement denying the entire averments made in the claim petition and also denied the occurrence of the accident. Further, they contended that the rider of the offending motorbike did not possess the valid and effective driving license at the time of accident and hence sought for dismissal of the claim petition as against them.

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues. The claimant, in order to prove his case examined himself as P.W.1 and got marked the documents as Ex. P1 to Ex. P11. The doctor who treated the claimant was examined as P.W.2 and got marked the documents as Ex. C1 and Ex. C2. On behalf of the respondents, none of the witnesses were examined nor was any document marked.

On the basis of the oral and documentary evidence available on record, the Tribunal held that due to the rash and negligent riding of the motorbike, the accident had occurred and the claimant is entitled for compensation. With regard to quantum of compensation is concerned, in the accident, the claimant has sustained fracture of left tibia and fracture of 2nd, 3rd, and 4th metatarsal left leg. He had undergone surgery and implants have been inserted. He was inpatient in Hi-tech Medicare Hospital for a period of 10 days and thereafter he had taken followup treatment for a period of three months. At the time of accident, the claimant was aged about 36 years. Taking the income of the claimant at Rs. 4,500/- p.m., the Tribunal had awarded a sum of Rs. 25,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs. 18,000/- towards loss of income during the laid up period, Rs. 68,400/- towards medical expenditure, Rs. 20,000/- towards discomfort and loss of amenities of life, and Rs. 5,000/- towards conveyance, attendant and extra nourishment food charges. In all, a sum of Rs. 1,36,400/- was awarded with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. The claimant being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

Sri. K. Vishwanath, learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Though the claimant has sustained fracture of tibia and fracture of metatarsal bone and the doctor who treated the claimant had assessed the disability towards a particular limb to an extent of 15.33%, no compensation has been awarded under the said head. Though the claimant was earning more than Rs. 7,500/- p.m., as a Plumber, the Tribunal had taken the income of the claimant at Rs. 4,500/- p.m. which is on the lower side. Further, the compensation awarded towards pain and suffering is also on the lower side. Hence, sought for enhancement of compensation.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/Insurance Company argued in support of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and contended that the compensation awarded is just and fair compensation and sought for dismissal of the appeal.

I have carefully considered the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for the parties, perused the impugned judgment and award and other relevant records.

It is not in dispute that the claimant has sustained grievous injuries in the road traffic accident that occurred on 7-5-2010 due to the rash and negligent riding of the offending motorbike by the first respondent. The finding that the actionable negligence is on the part of the rider of the motorbike has become final. The only issue is with regard to quantum of compensation. The records clearly disclose that in the accident, the claimant has sustained fracture of left tibia and fracture of 2nd, 3rd and 4th metatarsal bone of left leg and other injuries to the body. Ex. P4, the wound certificate issued by the doctor clearly discloses the said injuries and the X-Ray taken by the doctor discloses the fracture of left tibia and metatarsal bone of the left leg. He had taken treatment in the Hi-tech Medicare Hospital, at Udupi as inpatient from 7-5-2010 to 15-5-2010. Thereafter, once again he was readmitted from 4-8-2010 to 7-8-2010 for removal of implants. The appellant as a Plumber was out of employment for a period of more than three months. In view of the two surgeries, he had suffered a lot. The compensation of Rs. 25,000/- awarded towards pain and suffering is on the lower side. Hence, he is entitled to another sum of Rs. 25,000/- towards pain and suffering. Though the doctor had assessed the disability to an extent of 15.33% to a particular limb, no compensation has been awarded towards disability. The appellant has to lead his remaining life with that 15.33% disability. Hence, he is entitled to compensation towards disability. Taking into consideration the disability to an extent of 5%, taking the income of the claimant at Rs. 4,500/-, applying the appropriate multiplier of 16, the claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 40,000/- towards future loss of income due to disability. Hence, the claimant is entitled enhanced compensation of Rs. 65,000/- in addition to the compensation of Rs. 1,36,400/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. Accordingly, I pass the following:

"ORDER

The appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 14-08-2012 made in MVC No. 465/2010 passed by the Tribunal is modified. The claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs. 65,000/- with interest at the rate of 8% p.a., in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal."

Out of the enhanced compensation amount, 50% is directed to be deposited in any Nationalized Bank for a period of three years, with liberty to the appellant to withdraw the accrued interest periodically.