Kotresh Setty vs Ramakrishna

A.S. Pachhapure

The appellant dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident has filed this appeal seeking enhancement. The facts reveal that on 5.1.2009 at 6.30 a.m., the appellant was travelling in a Bus bearing Reg.No. KA 16/D-3595 on Challakere Road and the driver drove the Bus in a rash and negligent manner and hit the road side tree. Thereby, the appellant sustained grievous injuries to his head and other parts of the body and was treated in different hospitals. He was an in-patient for 13 days. He suffered disability. Hence, he claimed compensation for pain, suffering, mental agony, medical expenses etc.,

The respondents contested the claim of the appellant. During the enquiry, the appellant examined himself as PW. 1, a witness PW. 2 and in the evidence got marked the documents Exs. P.1 to P. 58. The Insurance Policy was marked as Ex. R.1 with consent. The Tribunal after hearing the counsel for the parties and on appreciation of the material on record held actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the Bus and granted compensation of Rs. 1,75,200/- with interest at 7% p.a. from the date of petition till payment. Dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, the present appeal has been filed.

I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. The point that arise for my consideration is:

Whether the appellant is entitled to enhanced compensation? If so, to what extent.?

The appellant has suffered the fracture of frontal bone of skull and two ribs in the accident. He was an inpatient for 13 days. He took follow up treatment. He has suffered disability to an extent of 15% of the whole body Therefore, he could have suffered sufficient pain, suffering and mental agony. The Tribunal has granted Rs. 25.000/- and I think that it is on the lower side and the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs. 10,000/- under this head.

The Tribunal has granted Rs. 10,000/- towards loss of amenities and it appears to be just and reasonable as the appellant has been paid the loss of future income.

So far as the assessment of the income is concerned, the Tribunal has considered at Rs. 3,000/- p.m. It is relevant to note that in respect of an accident in the year 2001, the Apex Court had assessed the income of a coolie at Rs. 100/- per day. There is increase in the prices and also the wages since for the last few years. Hence. I think it is just and proper to consider the income at Rs. 4,000/- p.m. Furthermore, the appellant has examined PW. 2 the Doctor who has assessed the disability at 15% of the whole body. Thereby, the appellant has to be paid compensation towards loss of income. Hence, he is entitled to Rs. 4,000 x 12 x 18 x 15/100 - 1,29,600/-. Deducting the amount already paid, (1,29,600-97,200 = 32,400) the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs. 32,400/-.

The appellant suffered a fracture and was an in patient for 13 days and it requires some reasonable time for healing the fracture and to resume to normal duties. Considering this aspect, it is just and proper to grant Rs. 12,000/- as loss of income during the period of treatment. Hence, he is entitled to an additional sum of Rs. 4,000/- on this head.

So far as the compensation towards medical expenses is concerned, though the appellant has produced bills worth Rs. 12,000/-, the Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs. 35,000/- and I think that it includes the attendant charges. transportation, food etc., Thereby, the compensation paid on the said head is appropriate and proper. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 46,400/-, in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till payment. Hence, I answer the point in affirmative and proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

The appeal is allowed in part. In addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant is entitled to additional compensation of Rs. 46,400/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till payment. The appellant is permitted to withdraw the amount enhanced.