Doddanayaka vs M/s. Khaitan Logistics Pvt. Ltd. and The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

S. Abdul Nazeer, J.—This appeal by the claimant is directed against the judgment and award in MVC No. 976/2009 dated 6.9.2011 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Tumkur, whereby the court below has awarded total compensation of Rs. 2,66,287/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of deposit. Learned Counsel for the appellant would contend that on account of the accident, left leg of the claimant above the knee was amputated The Doctor has assessed permanent disability of 90% to a particular limb and 45% to the whole body. The Tribunal has taken the permanent disability at 30% to the whole body. The claimant was working as a coolie and earning more than Rs. 6,000/- per month. The Tribunal has taken his income at Rs. 3,000/- per month. It is argued that on account of the accident, the claimant had suffered a lot. He has not been able to lead his life as before. The award of compensation towards pain and suffering and loss of amenities is on the lower side. The Tribunal ought to have awarded appropriate compensation towards future medical expenses. The compensation awarded under all other heads is also inadequate.

On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-Insurance Company has sought to justify the impugned judgment and award.

I have carefully considered the arguments of the learned Counsel made at the Bar and perused the materials placed on record.

There is no dispute as to the occurrence of the accident and the liability of the respondent-Insurance Company to pay compensation. Having regard to the contentions urged, the only question for consideration is as to whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is adequate?

The accident had occurred on 2.7.2009. The claimant was working as a cleaner of the lorry. Though he has contended that he was earning more than Rs. 6,000/- per month, the said contention has not been established. I am of the view that it is just and proper to notionally fix his income at Rs. 4,500/- per month.

On account of the accident, his left leg above the knee has been amputated. Because of this, he is not in a position to work as cleaner as before. According to the Doctor, the claimant had sustained 45% permanent disability to the whole body and 90% permanent disability to a particular limb. Keeping in mind the age of the claimant and his avocation, it is just and proper to hold 60% functional disability. By taking the income of the claimant at Rs. 4,500/- per month with the application of multiplier 18 and 60% functional disability, the compensation payable towards loss of future earning comes to Rs. 5,83,200/-.

As stated above, on account of the amputation, he is not able to enjoy his life as before. He has suffered a lot because of the accident. A sum of Rs. 50,000/- has to be awarded towards pain and suffering and Rs. 1 lakh towards loss of amenities. The medical expenses awarded by the Tribunal in a sum of Rs. 18,987/- is just and reasonable. A sum of Rs. 9,000/- (two months earning) is awarded towards loss of income during the laid up period. A sum of Rs. 10,000/- is awarded towards conveyance, nourishment, etc. He is also entitled for a sum of Rs. 1 lakh towards future medical expenses and loss of marriage prospects.

Thus, the claimant is entitled for compensation as under:

The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,66,287/- which has to be deducted from the aforesaid amount and the balance of compensation payable to the claimant is Rs. 6,04,900/-. The said sum of Rs. 6,04,900/- shall carry interest at 6% per annum. In the result, the appeal succeeds and it is accordingly allowed in part. The respondent-Insurance company is directed to deposit a sum of Rs. 6,04 900/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of deposit within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Out of the enhanced amount, Rs. 5,00,000/- has to be kept in fixed deposit in the name of the appellant in a Nationalised Bank for a period of five years. The appellant is permitted to withdraw the interest annually. The appellant is permitted to withdraw the balance of the amount on its deposit. No costs.