Madesh vs Santhosh and Others

B. Sreenivas Gowda, J.—Sri. B. Pradeep was directed to take notice for Respondent No. 3-Insurance Company and he appeared on behalf of it. Therefore, he is granted two weeks time to file vakalath.

This appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

Heard, the appeal is admitted and with the consent of learned counsel appearing for parties, it is taken-up for final disposal.

For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal.

As there is no dispute regarding injuries sustained by the claimant in a road traffic accident occurred on 25.06.2008 due to rash and negligent driving of the Luggage Auto bearing registration No. KA-03-ES-767 by its driver and liability of the insurer of the said vehicle, the only point that arises for my consideration in the appeal is:

"Whether quantum of compensation of awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?"

After hearing the learned counsel appearing for parties and perusing the judgment and award of the Tribunal, I am of the view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable, it is on the lower side and hence it is required to be enhanced.

As per wound certificate Ex. P-6, the claimant has sustained the following injuries:--

"a) Abrasion 1/2 Cm x 1/2 cm right cheek;

b) Hematoma right cheek 5 x 3 cm;

c) Swelling of right leg 3 x 4 cms;

d) Fracture of right tibia and fibula mid shaft;

e) Communited fracture right calcaneum;

f) Abrasion left ring and middle finger;"

Injuries sustained by the claimant and treatment undergone by him are also evident from Exs. P15 & P16: x-rays, Ex. P17-Discharge Summary and supported by oral evidence of the claimant and Doctor, who were examined as P.Ws. 1 to 2 respectively. P.W. 2-Dr. Ramesh in his evidence has stated that the claimant has suffered disability of 20% to the limb and 7% to the whole body.

Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- is awarded towards ''pain and suffering'' as against Rs. 25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

As Rs. 40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards ''medical expenses'' is based on the medical bills and prescriptions produced by the claimant, it is just and proper and there is no scope for enhancement under this head.

The claimant was treated as inpatient for a period of 17 days in Hill Side Hospital, Padmanabha Nagar, Bangalore and continued treatment as outpatient for 3 to 6 days. Considering the duration of treatment, Rs. 15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards ''incidental expenses'' such as conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges is just and proper and there is no scope for enhancement under this head.

The claimant claims to have been earning salary of Rs. 4,500/- per month and also incentive of 2% on the salary by working as a Distributor/Sales Representative in a private concern. Considering the age of the claimant as 25 years, year of accident as 2008 and avocation, as sales representative, his income could be assessed at Rs. 5,000/- p.m.. The nature of injuries suggest that he must have been under rest and treatment for a period of 4 months and therefore a sum of Rs. 20,000/- is awarded towards loss of income during laid up period'' as against Rs. 13,500/- awarded by the Tribunal.

Considering the disability stated by the doctor and an amount of discomfort and unhappiness which the claimant has to undergo in his future life, Rs. 25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of amenities'' is just and proper and there is no scope for enhancement.

The income of the claimant is assessed at Rs. 5,000/- p.m. P.W. 2-Doctor in his evidence has stated that claimant has suffered 7% disability to the whole body. The multiplier applicable to his age group is ''18'' Therefore, the loss of future income'' works out to Rs. 75,600/- (Rs. 5,000 x 7 x 12 x 18/100) and it is awarded.

Considering the nature of injuries, Rs. 8,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards ''future medical expenses'' is just and proper and there is no scope for enhancement under this head.

Thus, the claimant is entitled for the revised compensation. The break-up is as follows:--

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed-in-part. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated herein above. The claimant is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs. 1,23,100/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation.

Respondent No. 3-Insurance Company is directed to deposit the additional compensation amount together with interest within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, excluding interest for a period of delay of 246 days in filing the appeal.

Out of the said additional compensation of Rs. 1,23,100/-, 75% of the amount with proportionate interest is ordered to be invested in fixed deposit in the name of claimant in any Nationalised Bank/Scheduled Bank/Grameena Bank/Post Office for a period of 3 years and with a right of option to withdraw interest periodically. Remaining amount with proportionate interest is ordered to be released in favour of the claimant.

The Tribunal while releasing 25% of the amount is also directed to issue the fixed deposit slips, so as to enable the claimant to withdraw the deposit amount on its maturity without approaching the Tribunal once again and the Bank is directed to release the fixed deposit amount without insisting for any further order from the Tribunal.

No order as to costs.