Gopi M. vs Manager Oriental Insurance Co Ltd.

Mr. B. Manohar, J.—The appellant is the claimant Being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the judgment and award dated 18.06.2011 passed in MVC No. 6271/2010 by the IX Addl. Senior Civil Judge, Small Causes Court and Member, MACT-7, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as ''the Tribunal'' for short), the claimant is before this Court seeking for enhancement of compensation.

The appellant had filed a claim petition contending that on 10.09.2010 while he was proceeding in a motorbike bearing registration No. KA-05-HF-9595 on J.Mariyappa Road at about 9.15 a.m. near Madhavana Park Circle from West to East direction, a car bearing registration No. KA-05-MH-7597 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the motorbike, due to which the claimant fell down and sustained grievous injuries all over the body. He has taken treatment at Maiya Multi Speciality Hospital. In the accident, the claimant sustained fracture of both bones of right leg and other grievous injuries. The claimant has undergone surgery for close reduction and internal fixation. He claimed that he has spent more than Rs. 60,000/- towards treatment.

At the time of accident, the claimant was working as a Technician and earning Rs. 25,000/- per month. In view of the actionable negligence on the part of driver of the vehicle which was insured with respondent No. 1 and respondent No. 2 being owner of the offending vehicle, both respondent Nos.2 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the extent of Rs. 7,00,000/-.

The Insurance Company defended the case by filing written statement. Alter trial, the Tribunal held that due to the actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the offending car, the accident occurred and hence, the claimant is entitled for compensation. With regard to the quantum of compensation is concerned, though the claimant claims that he was working as a Technician and earning Rs. 25,000/- per month, no documents have been produced to substantiate the same. The doctor who had treated the claimant assessed the disability to the extent of 24% to the fight lower limb. However, the Tribunal had taken the disability at 6% to the whole body. Since the claimant was aged about 25 years at the time of accident, the appropriate multiplier would be ''17''. The Tribunal taking into consideration the income at Rs. 3,000/- per month has awarded Rs. 36,720/- rounded off to Rs. 27,000/- towards loss of future income. Rs. 20,000/- towards pain and agony, Rs. 6,000/- has been awarded towards loss of income during laid up period, Rs. 40,000/- towards medical expenditure and Rs. 10,000/- each towards loss of amenities, Rs. 10,000/- towards future medical expenditure, Rs. 10,000/- towards conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges. In all Rs. 1,33,000/-with interest at 6% p.a. has been awarded. Being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded, the appellant is before this Court in this appeal.

I have carefully considered the arguments addressed by Sri D.Manmohan, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Ashok N. Naik, learned counsel for respondent No. 1/Insurance Company and perused the judgment and award, oral and documentary evidence on record.

The dispute in this appeal is only with regard to the quantum of compensation. The main contention of the appellant is that the accident occurred in the year 2010. Though the claimant has not produced any documents to prove the income of Rs. 25,000/- per month, the Tribunal ought to have taken reasonable income while awarding the compensation. In Lok Adalath and in the case of daily wage employees working in various Government Department, the income is taken at Rs. 5,500/- per month. Though the doctor who had treated the claimant assessed the disability to the extent at 24% to the limb, the Tribunal has taken the disability at 6% to the whole body which is contrary to law. The Tribunal ought to have taken ⅓rd of the disability as assessed by the doctor. Therefore, the disability would be arrived at 8% to the whole body.

Hence, taking the income of the claimant at Rs. 5,500/- per month and taking disability to the whole body at 8%, the claimant is entitled to the compensation at Rs. 89,760/- towards future loss of income as against a sum of Rs. 37,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Further the claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period. In all, the claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs. 62,760/- which is rounded off to Rs. 62,800/-. The enhanced compensation shall be deposited by the insurance company.

Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER

I) The appeal is allowed in part.

II) The judgment and award dated 18.06.2011 passed in MVC No. 6271/2010 by the Tribunal is modified to the extent indicated above.

III) The claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs. 62,800/- with interest at 6% p.a.

IV) The Insurance company shall deposit the enhanced compensation with interest within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.