Devendrappa vs Rajashekar Goravar and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimant-appellant for enhancement of compensation is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 02/02/2013, passed in MVC No. 100/2011, by the Senior Civil Judge and IX Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Harapanahalli, (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short).

The Tribunal, by its judgment and award has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,75,096/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till realization as against the claim of Rs. 28,53,000/-, on account of the injuries sustained by the appellant in the road traffic accident.

In brief, the facts of the case are:

"The appellant claims to be aged about 30 years at the time of the accident. He was hale and healthy prior to the accident, working as Hamali and also doing agricultural work. That on 12.11.2006 at about 10.00 p.m. near the land of one Gurubasavaraja on Harapanahalli-Kottur road, appellant was going towards Haralu village in a motor cycle bearing Reg. No. KA.17.S.784 along with one Chandrappa, at that time, the driver of the mini lorry bearing Reg. No. KA.27.5614 came from opposite side in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against his motor cycle. Due to which, both rider and pillion rider fell down on the right side of the road and appellant sustained bleeding injuries on right thigh, middle of head, right forearm. Immediately, he was admitted to Government General Hospital, Harapanahalli, then he was referred to Davanagere Hospital for higher treatment, where, he took treatment as inpatient for three months, underwent two surgeries and thereafter, on the advise of the Doctor, he has taken bed rest and follow up treatment."

It is the further case of the appellant that, he spent considerable amount towards medical expenses, conveyance and other incidental charges. On account of the injuries sustained by the appellant in the said accident, he has suffered permanent disability. The Doctor has assessed the physical disability at 48% on his right lower limb. Therefore, appellant has filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the respondents.

The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides and after assessing the oral and documentary evidence, has allowed the said claim petition in part and awarded a sum of Rs. 1,75,096/- as compensation under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization.

Being dis-satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant has presented this appeal.

The submission of the learned counsel appearing for appellant, at the outset is that, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards injury, pain and suffering, and in not awarding any compensation towards loss of amenities, discomforts and unhappiness and what is awarded towards injury, pain and sufferings is inadequate and it requires to be enhanced reasonably. To substantiate the said submission, he has submitted on the basis of the evidence of the Doctor that, on account of the grievous injuries sustained by the appellant, he is having permanent disability on his right lower limb at 48% and there is shortening of leg and on account of injuries, he has taken treatment as inpatient for 100 days, underwent surgeries, implants were inserted, during the said period, he underwent lot of mental shock and pain and agony as he has suffered fractures and discomforts and unhappiness persists through out his life, it would affect his earning capacity and now he is not in a position to do his work as he was doing earlier. But these aspects of the matter have not been considered or appreciated by the Tribunal while awarding compensation. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified by enhancing the compensation reasonably.

Per contra, learned counsel Sri. K. Suryanarayana Rao, appearing for insurer, inter- alia, contended and submitted that, the Tribunal, after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and taking into consideration the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, nature and duration of treatment and the percentage of disability suffered by him, has justified in awarding reasonable compensation under all the heads and therefore, it does not call for interference.

After careful consideration of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the appellant, learned counsel appearing for Insurer and after perusal of the materials available on record, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for our consideration is:

"Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?"

The occurrence of the accident and the resultant injuries sustained by the appellant as per Ex. P7- wound certificate are not in dispute. The Tribunal, taking into consideration the oral and documentary evidence available on file, has justified in awarding a sum of Rs. 7,000/- towards medical expenses and nourishment, Rs. 20,800/- towards loss of income during treatment period and Rs. 1,27,296/- towards loss of future income and therefore, it does not call for interference.

However, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards injury, pain and sufferings and in not awarding any compensation towards loss of amenities, discomforts and unhappiness due to disability and therefore, it needs to be awarded reasonably. Admittedly, on account of the grievous injuries sustained by the appellant, he has taken treatment as inpatient for 100 days, underwent surgeries during the said period, he might have undergone lot of pain and agony and on account of grievous injuries sustained by him in the accident, he has suffered permanent disability and the Doctor, after clinical examination has assessed permanent disability at 48% to right lower limb and the Tribunal, after assigning valid reasons has assessed the disability at 16% to the whole body and we accept the same. Discomforts and unhappiness persists through out his life and it would affect his happiness in future life and also affects his earning capacity and the same has to be compensated reasonably. Therefore, taking into consideration the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant and the percentage of disability suffered by him, we deem it fit to award another sum of Rs. 50,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 02/02/2013, passed in MVC No. 100/2011, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, IX Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Harapanahalli, stands modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 50,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization, in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

The third respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 50,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and award.

Immediately on such deposit by the Insurer, the enhanced compensation with interest shall be released in favour of the appellant.

Draw the award, accordingly.