Dennis D''Souza vs Gangadhar K. and Others

N.K. Patil, J—This appeal by the claimant is directed against the judgment and award dated 1st December 2014, passed in MVC No. 1716/2012, by the I Additional District & Sessions Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, D.K., Mangalore, (for short, ''Tribunal''), for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 80,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. awarded in favour of the claimant as against his claim for Rs. 4,00,000/-, is inadequate.

The appellant claims to be aged about 44 years and was hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That the occurrence of accident at about 6:00 P.M., on 10-09-2012, when the appellant was standing on the side of Bikarnakatta Padil Road, near Hotel Kodandaram in order to cross the road, on account of rash and negligent riding by the rider of Motor Cycle bearing Registration No.KA-19/EB-1552 is not in dispute. Due to the impact, the appellant has sustained grievous injuries and was immediately shifted to Primary Health Centre, Belthangady and after initial treatment, he was shifted to Mangalore Nursing Home and he took treatment as in-patient till 17-09-2012.

On account of the injuries sustained in the accident, the appellant filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, before the Tribunal, seeking compensation of a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- against the Insurance Company and another. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 1st December, 2014. 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 compensation of Rs. 80,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant has filed the appeal before this Court, seeking enhancement of compensation.

I have gone through the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal and the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal and heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant.

Shn. G. Ravishankar Shastry, learned counsel appearing for appellant at the outset vehemently submitted that, the Tribunal grossly erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges, loss of income during treatment period and loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness on account of the grievous injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. To substantiate the said submission, he is quick to point out and submit that on account of the road traffic accident, the appellant sustained cerebral concussion with contusion over the frontal bones of the brain and other injury and further was in-patient for more than a week. Further, he submitted that on account of the injuries sustained and disability, the appellant did not attend to work for a period of nearly eight months. All these aspects of the matter have not been properly appreciated or considered by Tribunal, while awarding compensation. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal is liable to be modified, by enhancing reasonable compensation.

After hearing the learned counsel appearing for appellant, after perusal of the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal, and after due consideration of the entire material available on file, it can be seen that the Tribunal, after proper evaluation the oral evidence of PWs 1 and 2 and documentary evidence at Exs. P1 to P12 and Ex. R1, has rightly assessed the income of the appellant at Rs. 7,500/- per month, considering the fact that the appellant is a driver of heavy Goods vehicle, in the absence of any documentary evidence. Further, the Tribunal is justified in awarding a sum of Rs. 22,500/- towards loss of income during treatment period at the rate of Rs. 7,500/- per month, for a period of three months.

As the appellant has not sustained any permanent disability, the Tribunal is justified in awarding a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness on account of the injuries sustained.

Admittedly, the appellant has sustained cerebral concussion with contusion over the frontal bones of the brain and other injuries as per Wound Certificate at Ex. P4. For the treatment of the said injuries, he was hospitalized for more than a week and the case sheet is produced at Ex. P12 and discharge summary issued by Mangalore Nursing Home is produced at Ex. P9. During the period of treatment, he would have spent some sum towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges. Therefore, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 30,000/- towards pain and sufferings, for the injuries sustained and Rs. 6,400/- towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges. The same is just and proper.

Further, the appellant has produced medical bills amounting to Rs. 10,350/-. Considering the nature of injuries sustained and nature and duration of treatment undergone, the Tribunal has awarded the entire compensation sought for by appellant towards medical expenses.

Thus, the Tribunal, after taking into consideration each and every aspect and after proper appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, age, avocation, year of accident, nature of injuries sustained, nature and duration of treatment undergone, etc. has awarded just and reasonable compensation under each head and in all, it awarded a sum of Rs. 80,000/- on account of the injuries sustained by the appellant in the road traffic accident.

Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the Tribunal has rightly awarded compensation under all the heads and interference in the well considered and well reasoned judgment and award is not called for.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal filed by appellant is liable to be dismissed as being devoid of merit. Accordingly, it is dismissed.

Office to draw award, accordingly.