Jaganath vs Puttappa and another

B. Manohar, J. - The claimant being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in judgment and award dated 26-11-2015 made in MVC No. 139/2013 passed by the MACT, Haveri (hereinafter referred to as "Tribunal") filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

The claimant has filed the claim petition contending that on 11-3-2013 while he was proceeding as a pillion rider in a motorcycle bearing No. KA-27-Q-7004 due to the rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle by its rider it was skidded. Due to the impact the claimant has fell down and sustained multiple commuted fracture of middle candilayer and fracture of tibia and other injuries to the body. He had taken treatment at Kshema Orthopaedic Centre, Hubballi. He was an inpatient for a period of 12 days and undergone surgery. He has spent more than Rs. 1,00,000/- towards treatment and prior to the accident he was working as an agriculturist and earning Rs. 10,000/- per month. In view of the injuries sustained and surgery undergone, he cannot work as an agriculturist. Hence, sought for compensation of Rs. 10 lakhs.

In pursuance of the notices issued by the Tribunal, owner of the vehicle though served with notice remained unrepresented. Respondent No. 2-Insurance Company filed written statement denying the entire averments made in the claim petition and also contended that rider of the motorcycle does not possess valid and effective licence as on the date of the accident. Hence, the insurer is not liable to pay compensation and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties the Tribunal framed necessary issues. The claimant in order to prove his case examined himself as PW 1. The Doctor who treated the injured was examined as P.W. 2. On behalf of the respondent the Administrative Officer of R2 was examined as RW 1 and two documents have been marked.

The Tribunal after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence let in by the parties and Police records, i.e., IMV Report, spot panchanama, copy of the complaint and charge-sheet, held that the claimant has sustained injury in the road traffic accident. Since, in the accident, the claimant has sustained commuted fracture of the candilayer, tibia and other injuries. He has undergone surgery, implants are made to the limb. Though the claimant claims that he was earning Rs. 10,000/- per month no documents are produced to substantiate the same, taking into consideration income of the claimant as Rs. 6,000/- per month, applying the disability to an extent of 10%, at the time of accident he was aged about 49 years applied multiplier 13, awarded a sum of Rs. 1,02,960/- towards future loss of income, Rs. 1,61,540/- towards medical expenses, Rs. 20,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs. 10,000/- towards food, diet, nourishment, Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period, Rs. 10,000/-towards loss of amenities. In all a sum of Rs. 3,19,500/- with interest at 6% p.a. was awarded. Being not satisfied with the same, the claimant has filed this appeal.

The occurrence of accident and injuries sustained by the injured is not disputed by the Insurance Company. The only dispute in this appeal is with regard to the quantum of compensation. The accident occurred in the year 2013. Admittedly, the claimant is an agriculturist by profession, the income of Rs. 6,000/- by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Even a daily wager working in the Government Department is taken as Rs. 7,000/-, the agriculturist cannot be treated as a daily wage employee. Hence, deem it appropriate to assess income of the injured at Rs. 7,000/- per month as appropriate. Taking disability at 11%, applying the multiplier 13 the claimant is entitled for compensation of Rs. 1,20,120/- as against Rs. 1,02,690/- towards future loss of income.

Further, the amount of Rs. 20,000/-awarded towards pain and suffering is on the lower side since the claimant has sustained multiple fractures and undergone surgery. Hence, another sum of Rs. 10,000/- is awarded towards pain and suffering. Further, the claimant is entitled for another sum of Rs. 10,000/- apart from Rs. 10,000/- towards amenities, since he has to lead rest of his life with 10% disability. Further, the claimant is entitled to Rs. 4,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period. The claimant in all is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs. 40,160/- rounded of to Rs. 40,000/- in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation. Hence, the following order is passed.

ORDER

Appeal is allowed in part. Judgment and award passed by the M.A.C.T. in MV.C. No. 139/2013 is modified. The claimant is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs. 40,160/- rounded of to Rs. 40,000/- in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation.