Gangaiah vs Syed Afroz and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimant is directed against the judgment and award dated 1st September, 2010 passed in M.V.C. No. 6756/2009, by the XXIV Additional Small Causes Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 25,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. awarded in favour of the claimant as against his claim for Rs. 5,00,000/-, is inadequate.

The appellant claims to be aged about 26 years and hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That the occurrence of accident of the appellant at about 5:00 P.M., on 22-03-2009, when the appellant was riding the motor cycle bearing Registration No. KA-02/HE-611 from Settyhally towards Bangalore, near Settyhally, ring road, petrol bunk, Tumkur, on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of Lorry bearing Registration No. KA-19/6905 is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the appellant has sustained lacerated wound in the right tempo parietal junction, multiple abrasion over forehead, injury on right upper limb, lacerated wound over right cubital fossa, abrasion over dorsum of left thumb, abrasion over left index finger, multiple abrasion right half of the chest, multiple abrasion over the umbilical region, lacerated wound just by the side of right patella and abrasion over right ankle. Due to the said injuries sustained in the accident, he took treatment in Tumkur District Hospital, Tumkur, Sri Sidhartha Hospital and also at HIMHANS.

It is his further case that, on account of the injuries sustained in the accident, he has undergone severe pain and agony and for the treatment of the said injuries, he has spent reasonable amount towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges including medical expenses and other incidental expenses and therefore, he has to be compensated reasonably.

The learned counsel for appellant contends that, the Tribunal has erred in awarding global compensation of a sum of Rs. 25,000/- on account of the grievous injuries sustained by appellant in the road traffic accident. He submitted that having regard to the nature of injuries sustained and nature and duration of treatment undergone, reasonable compensation may be awarded under different heads, by modifying the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal.

As against this, learned counsel appearing for Insurer sought to substantiate the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal, stating that the same is passed after due consideration of the oral and documentary evidence and also taking into consideration the age, avocation, nature of injuries sustained, nature and duration of treatment undergone, medical bills, etc. and hence, interference in the same is not called for.

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. 5,00,000/- against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 1st September, 2010. 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. 25,000/- under different heads, 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 is in 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 and also Insurer.

After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and after careful perusal of the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal, it can be seen that, the Tribunal, after assessing the oral and documentary evidence available on file, has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation. Admittedly, due to the road traffic accident, the appellant has sustained lacerated wound in the right tempo parietal junction, multiple abrasion over forehead, injury on right upper limb, lacerated wound over right cubital fossa, abrasion over dorsum of left thumb, abrasion over left index finger, multiple abrasion right half of the chest, multiple abrasion over the umbilical region, lacerated wound just by the side of right patella and abrasion over right ankle. He has taken treatment at District Hospital, Tumkur and thereafter at Sidhartha Hospital from 21-05-2009 to 01-06-2009 and also at NIMHANS for three days, on 22/03/2009, 23/03/2009 and 30/09/2009. The Tribunal has disbelieved the same on the ground that the appellant has not produced any documentary evidence. But, during the treatment period and also follow-up treatment, he would have spent reasonable amount towards conveyance nourishing food and attendant charges. The appellant being aged about 26 years has undergone pain and agony and he cannot do his work as before. Considering the age, avocation, nature of injuries sustained, nature and duration of treatment undergone, and also the fact that on account of the injuries, the appellant has undergone lot of unsaid pain and agony, I deem it fit to award a global compensation of a sum of Rs. 30,000/-, with interest at 6% per annum, in addition to the compensation 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 1st September, 2010 passed in M.V.C. No. 6756/2009, by the XXIV Additional Small Causes Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore is hereby modified, awarding compensation of a sum of Rs. 30,000/-, with interest at 6% per annum, from the date of petition till the date of realization, in addition to the compensation awarded by Tribunal.

The second respondent - Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 30,000/-, with interest thereon at 6% per annum, from the date of petition till the date of realization, within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment.

On such deposit by the Insurer, the entire sum shall be released in favour of the appellant, immediately.

Office to draw award, accordingly.