Jayaramu vs C.V. Prashanth and Others

N.K. Patil, J—This appeal by the claimant is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 12th July 2013 passed in M.V.C. No. 1284/2012 on the file of the III Additional District Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mysore, (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short) seeking enhancement of compensation.

The Tribunal by its impugned judgment and award, has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,68,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization under different heads on account of the grievous injuries sustained by the appellant in the road traffic accident. The claimant has presented this appeal on the ground that the quantum of compensation and the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and requires enhancement.

Brief facts of the case of the appellant are that, he was aged about 56 years, working as Instructor in KSRTC and hale and healthy prior to the accident. Be that as it may, he met with an accident on 01.04.2012 at about 10.20 a.m. on Mysore - K.R. Pet Main Road, in front of Old Kalpavruksha Daba near Chmakurali, when he was riding his motorcycle No. KA-54/E-9933 slowly and cautiously on the left side of the road. At that time, the driver of Icon Car bearing registration No. KA-13/M-3870 drove the same at high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the said Motorcycle from back side. On account of which, he sustained fracture of right Tibia, fracture of right Olecranon with Nasal bone fracture and other multiple facial lacerations. On account of which, he undergone treatment from 01.04.2012 to 06.04.2012 and as per Ex. P8, he was advised bed rest for four months on account of injuries sustained. On account of the grievous injuries, he has to suffer discomfort, unhappiness and frustration throughout his life. Further, it is the case of the appellant that he is not in a position to work as he was doing prior to the accident because of the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. Taking all these aspects into consideration, the claimant filed a claim petition under Section 166 of M.V. Act before the Tribunal against the respondents claiming compensation on account of the grievous injuries sustained in the road traffic accident. The said matter had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal in turn after due consideration of oral and documentary evidence and other material available on record, year of accident, nature of injuries sustained by the appellant in the road traffic accident, allowed the said claim petition in part and awarded a sum of Rs. 1,68,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization. Being dissatisfied with the impugned Judgment and Award passed by the Tribunal, the appellant has presented this appeal on the ground that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and requires enhancement.

The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant Sri. R.D. Renukaradhya appearing for M/s. P. Nataraju Associates, has fairly submitted and contended that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards injury, pain and suffering and what is awarded is on the lower side and the same requires for enhancement. To substantiate his contentions, he has taken us through the evidence of PW-3 - Dr. Shree Harsha and in turn he opined that has suffered injury - right tibia fracture, nasal bone fracture and other multiple facial lacerations. On account of which, he undergone treatment and the Doctor has advised bed rest and follow up treatment. These aspects of the matter have not been looked into nor appreciated by the Tribunal while awarding compensation. Further, he submitted that the Tribunal has erred in awarding interest at the rate of only 6% p.a. as the accident has occurred in the year 2012. Following the judgments of Apex Court and this Court, in host of judgments, the rate of interest may be awarded at 9% p.a. to 10% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. Therefore, he submits that the impugned Judgment and Award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be modified by awarding reasonable compensation and higher rate of interest.

As against this, the learned Counsel appearing for the 1st and 4th respondents inter-alia contended and sought to substantiate that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is after due consideration of oral and documentary evidence and other material available on record. Therefore, interference by this Court is not called for.

After careful consideration of the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for consideration is:

"Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?"

Occurrence of the accident and the resultant grievous injuries sustained by the appellant in the road traffic accident are not in dispute. The appellant was aged about 56 years, working initially as Driver and thereafter as on the date of accident as Instructor and hale and healthy, prior to the accident, which is also not in dispute. He met with a road traffic accident on 01.04.2012 and on account of it, he undergone treatment in the Hospital as inpatient and suffered discomfort, unhappiness during the treatment period. He might have also spent reasonable amount towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges. The Doctor has advised bed rest and follow up treatment for more than four months and as per the wound certificate and X-Ray - Ex. P2 and Ex. P17 the appellant has suffered fracture of right tibia, fracture of right Olecranon with Nasal bone fracture and other multiple facial lacerations and he might have suffered pain and suffering during the treatment period and might have spent huge amount towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges on account of the permanent injuries sustained in the road traffic accident.

Taking all these relevant aspects into consideration as stated supra, we deem it fit to award a sum of Rs. 60,000/- towards injury, pain and suffering as against Rs. 25,000/- and Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of amenities, discomfort, unhappiness as against Rs. 20,000/-. The Tribunal is justified in awarding reasonable compensation under other heads and interference by this Court is not called for.

Further, as rightly contended by the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant that the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is at only 6% p.a. which is on the lower side. In the light of the judgments of Apex Court and this Court, we deem it fit to award interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. Therefore, the appellant/claimant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 65,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realization on the entire compensation.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case referred above, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 12th July 2013 passed in M.V.C. No. 1284/2012 on the file of the III Additional District Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mysore is hereby modified awarding additional compensation of a sum of Rs. 65,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. on entire compensation from the date of petition till the date of realization.

The 3rd respondent - Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 65,000/- with interest at 9% p.a. on entire compensation from the date of petition till the date of realization, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment and award.

The entire enhanced compensation of Rs. 65,000/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. on the entire compensation shall be released in favour of the appellant immediately on deposit by the 3rd respondent.

Draw the award, accordingly.