Amresh Kumar @ Amrish vs Syed Nayazuddin, Inayatulla and The Branch Manager

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimant is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 3rd February 2011, passed in MVC No. 5503/2009, by the XIII Additional Small Cause Judge & Member, MACT, Court of small Causes at Bangalore, (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 4,93,110/-, awarded in his favour as against his claim for Rs. 50,00,000/-, is inadequate. The appellant claims to be aged about 22 years and a Student of III year MBBS at Dr. B.R. Ambedkar College. He was hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That at about 11:15 A.M., on 10-04-2009, when the appellant was proceeding in a Motor cycle bearing Registration No. KA-04/EZ-3021, along with his relative Nikhil at Jayamahal Road, J.C. Nagar, Bangalore, at that time, he met with an accident, on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of Car bearing Registration No. KA-01/ME-1425. Due to the impact, the appellant fell down and sustained grievous injuries and was immediately taken to Shifaa Hospital, Bangalore and thereafter to Hosmat Hospital.

It is the case of the appellant that he has spent considerable amount towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges including medical expenses and other incidental expenses and therefore, he has to be compensated adequately.

On account of the injuries sustained in the accident, the appellant filed the claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, before the Tribunal, seeking compensation of a sum of Rs. 50.00 lakhs against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 3rd February, 2011. The Tribunal, after considering the relevant material available on file and after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part, awarding a sum of Rs. 4,93,110/- with interest at 6% per annum on Rs. 4,73,110/-, from the date of petition till the date of deposit and directed the Insurer of the offending vehicle to indemnify the award amount. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant is in appeal before this Court, seeking enhancement of compensation.

We have heard learned counsel for appellant and learned counsel appearing for Insurer, for considerable length of time.

Smt. Jyothi M. Maradi, appearing for Shri. Gowthamdev C, learned counsel appearing for appellant vehemently submitted that the Tribunal grossly erred in not assessing reasonable income of the appellant and assessing the same at only Rs. 4,000/- per month and the same is liable to be re-assessed. She submits that the appellant was aged about 22 years and was pursuing his III year MBBS course at Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. Because of the accidental injuries, he took treatment for a total period of 22 days in the Hospital and has also examined Doctor, who has assessed the permanent whole body disability at 15% and undergone two surgeries. Further, during treatment and follow-up treatment, the appellant has undergone lot of unsaid pain and agony and also spent huge sums towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges and therefore, reasonable compensation has to be awarded.

She further submitted that on account of the accidental injuries, the appellant has not attended one semester, resulting in loss of payment of admission fees made in respect of MBBS course under payment category. The appellant hails from Bihar State and has to pay a sum of Rs. 3,45,000/- per year in respect of re-admission fee. Further, on account of disability, the appellant would not be normal and cannot do his work as effective as before the accident. All these aspects of the matter are neither looked into nor considered or appreciated by Tribunal while awarding compensation of a sum of Rs. 4,93,110/-. Therefore, she submitted that the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal is liable to be modified by awarding reasonable compensation.

As against this, learned counsel appearing for both the Insurance Companies vehemently submitted the Tribunal, after critical evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file, has awarded just and reasonable compensation for the injuries sustained by the appellant. Hence, interference in the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal is uncalled for.

After hearing learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel appearing for the Insurer and also after perusal of the judgment and award passed by Tribunal including the original records placed before us, the only point that arise for our consideration in this appeal is:

Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by Tribunal is just and reasonable?

After going through the entire material available on file, it can be seen that, occurrence of accident and the resultant injuries sustained by appellant are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that he was aged about 22 years and pursuing his III year MBBS at Dr. B.R. Ambedkar College. The Tribunal, after assessing the oral and documentary evidence available on file, has rightly awarded compensation of a sum of Rs. 20,000/- future medical expenses. Hence, interference in the same is uncalled for.

However, so far as the compensation awarded under other heads, viz. injury, pain and sufferings, loss of future earnings, loss of one academic year, conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges, medical expenses and loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness is concerned, the same is on the lower side and needs to be re-determined. Admittedly, in view of the road traffic accident, the appellant has sustained injury to the left leg, left side of the chest and fracture of ribs 1 and 2 and fracture of clavicle, fracture of left femur and fracture of ulna. PW 2, Orthopedic Surgeon has deposed that the appellant has sustained whole body disability at 32%. But, the Tribunal has re-assessed the disability at 10%. The same, in our opinion is on the lower side. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained by appellant, age and avocation, we re-assess the whole body disability at 15%, to meet the ends of justice. The appellant being aged about only 22 years, has to endure this disability for the rest of his life. Because of the injuries sustained, he must have definitely lost one semester of III year MBBS. Further, the monthly income of Rs. 4,000/- assessed by Tribunal is on the lower side. The appellant was prosecuting his studies in III year MBBS. Therefore, having regard to the age, avocation, year of accident and also the qualification, we re-assess the monthly income of the appellant at Rs. 6,000/-, to meet the ends of justice. Further, it is stated that the appellant took treatment as in-patient for quite a long period of 22 days, on account of the grievous injuries sustained. During this period, he must have undergone lot of unsaid pain and agony and must have also spent reasonable sum towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges apart from incidental expenses. Since the appellant was aged about 22 years at the time of accident, the proper multiplier applicable is ''18'' as per the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court in Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, Further, it can be seen that the appellant has lost one semester and he is from Bihar prosecuting his studies in MBBS course under payment category, by paying quite a huge sum towards admission fee. Therefore, having regard to the age, avocation, nature of injuries, disability, and the facts and circumstances of the case on hand, we award a sum of Rs. 75,000/- towards injury, pain and sufferings as against Rs. 50,000/-; Rs. 1,94,400/- (i.e. Rs. 6,000/- x 12 x''18'' x 15/100) towards loss of future income/disability as against; Rs. 86,400/-; Rs. 1,72,500/- towards loss of educational career as against Rs. 50,000/-; and Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness as against Rs. 30,000/- awarded by Tribunal.

Further, so far as medical expenses and conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges is concerned, learned counsel appearing for both parties, after going through the records available on file, submitted that a sum of Rs. 2,83,660/- may be awarded towards medical expenses as per the medical bills including conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges as against Rs. 2,56,710/- awarded by Tribunal. Accordingly, in the light of the submission of learned counsel appearing for both parties and after perusal of records, we award a sum of Rs. 2,83,660/- towards medical expenses as per the medical bills, including conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges as against Rs. 2,56,710/- awarded by Tribunal. In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, the appeal filed by appellant is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 3rd February 2011, passed in MVC No. 5503/2009, by the XIII Additional Small Cause Judge & Member, MACT, Court of small Causes at Bangalore, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 7,95,560/- as against Rs. 4,93,110/- awarded by Tribunal, with interest at 6% per annum on the enhanced sum, from the date of petition till the date of realization. The enhanced compensation works out to Rs. 3,02,450/-. The break-up is as follows:

The third respondent/Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 3,02,450/-, with interest thereon at 6% per annum, within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment.

On such deposit by the owner, a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of the appellant, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized Bank, for a period of ten years, renewable by another ten years, with liberty reserved to him to withdraw the periodical interest.

Remaining sum of Rs. 1,02,450/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant, immediately.

Office to draw award, accordingly.