AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J.—This is claimant''s appeal for enhancement of compensation against the impugned judgment and award dated 5.11.04 passed in MVC No. 62/2003 on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr.Dn.) & Addl. MACT, Challakere, (hereinafter referred to as Tribunal'' for short).
By its judgment and award, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 6,74,302/- with interest at 8% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization on account of the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award, the appellant has presented this appeal, seeking enhancement, on the ground that, the amount awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate.
In brief, the facts of the case are:
The appellant claims that she was aged about 21 years, a BBM student and was hale and healthy prior to the accident. She had a brilliant academic career and after completing BBM, she wanted to pursue further studies in MBA but, unfortunately her future has been jeopardised by destiny on account of the injuries sustained by her in the road traffic accident that occurred on 13.11.2002. On the fateful day, at about 7.45 p.m. while she was travelling in an Autorikshaw bearing Registration No. KL/13/C/8124 along with her brother-in-law and sister from Municipal bus stand, Kannur, Kerala to Beach Hospital Padannapalam, Kannur, the driver of the said vehicle drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the gate rear Max Garden, due to which, the Auto capsized and the appellant fell down and sustained grievous injuries such as pain tenderness over the lower titoralic and lumber vertebra region, etc. She was unable to move the lower limbs due to weakness and she sustained traumatic paraparesis fracture of body of lumbar first vertebra, compression of cord presents and scheduled for Surgery on 15.11.02. The doctor has assessed the disability at 75% of the motor disability, 50% sensation disability, 75% of the bladder disability on account of the severe injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. She suffers from paraphysia. She has undergone treatment for a period of more than 50 days. Taking all these relevant factors, into consideration, the appellant has filed a claim petition before the Tribunal claiming compensation against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal, which in turn, after hearing both sides and after assessing the oral and documentary evidence, has allowed the said claim petition in part and awarded a sum Rs. 6,74,302/- as compensation under different beads with interest at 8% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award of the Tribunal, the appellant has >presented this appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation.
We have heard the learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned Counsel for the insurer for considerable length of time.
After careful evaluation of the judgment and award of the Tribunal and also the relevant records, what emerges is that, the Tribunal after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, relevant material on file and having regard to the nature of injuries and duration of treatment taken by the appellant has awarded just and reasonable compensation under the heads, pain and suffering, medical expenses, conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges, loss of marriage prospects, loss of amenities, loss of education and future medical expenses and therefore, it does not call for interference. However, the Tribunal has not awarded just and reasonable compensation towards loss of future income. The same needs to be enhanced.
The appellant was aged about 21 years studying in BBM course at the time of accident. The Tribunal is not justified in taking her income at Rs. 3,000/- p.m. It is on the lower side. Having regard to her brilliant academic career and the year of occurrence of the accident, the Tribunal ought to have assessed just and reasonable income of the appellant. Therefore, we can safely re-assess the income of the appellant at Rs. 5,000/- p.m. having regard to her educational career and future prospects to meet the ends of justice. The doctor-PW2 has opined that she suffered 75% of the motor disability, 50% sensation disability, 75% of the bladder disability, in all 200% disability which is permanent in nature. However, having regard to the nature of injuries and the percentage of disability, we re-assess whole body disability at 60%. It is relevant to extract the discharge summary as follows.
Ms. Geethavani is a 21 year old B.B.M. student admitted under us for rehabilitation following traumatic paraparesis #L1, after stabilization under Neurosurgery Since she had incontinent bladder, she was evaluated by Urology, CMG done in this regard showed non-active detrusor. She was taught C.I.C. for the same. In P.M.R. she was trained in bowel management with timed evacuation, high fibre diet and stool softening. Physiotherapy was given for gait training, stair climbing, active strengthening of B/L lower limbs, endurance exercises and aerobics. Occupational therapy was given for upper and lower extremity strengthening, long leg sitting with self support and direct transfers from 7" with minimal support. No spinal mobilization was done during the therapy since it was contraindicated and under the head of discharge summary, it was mentioned that patient is ambulatory under supervision. Regular bowel habit established, on CIC for bladder control. Patient needs to return for further rehabilitation program once her spine is stable for mobilisation.
The appropriate multiplier applicable for the case on hand is 18 as per the Smt. Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another, and we re-determine compensation towards loss of future income at Rs. 6,48,000/- (Rs. 5000/- x 12 x 18 x 60/100) as against Rs. 1,83,600/- awarded by the Tribunal.
In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award in MVC 62/2003 dated 5.11.2004 is hereby modified. The appellant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 11,38,702/- as against Rs. 6,74,302/-. The enhanced compensation comes to Rs. 4,64,400/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till the date of realisation.
The insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 4,64,400/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till realization within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the judgment and award.
From out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 4.64,400/-, a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in Fixed Deposit in any Nationalised Bank or Scheduled Bank for a period of ten years renewable by ten years with liberty to the appellant to withdraw the interest accrued on it quarterly.
The remaining enhanced compensation of Rs. 64,400/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant immediately on deposit by the insurer.
Office is directed to draw the award accordingly.