Manjamma vs The Managing Director, KSRTC Division

S. Abdul Nazeer, J.—This appeal by the claimant is directed against the judgment and award in MVC No. 6304/2008 dated 02.11.2010 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Bangalore, whereby the Court below has awarded total compensation of Rs. 1,00,200/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Learned counsel for the claimant/appellant would contend that the claimant had sustained grievous injuries in the accident. The Doctor has opined that the claimant had sustained 18% permanent disability to the whole body. However, the Court below has taken permanent disability at 12% to the whole body. It is further contended that the claimant was a vegetable vendor and was earning more than Rs. 6,000/- per month. However, the Court below has taken her income at Rs. 3,000/- for the purpose of computation of loss of future earning. It is argued that the award of compensation under all other heads is also not adequate.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-corporation has sought to justify the impugned judgment and award.

I have carefully considered the arguments of the learned counsel made at the Bar and perused the materials placed on record.

There is no dispute regarding the occurrence of the accident and liability on respondent-corporation for payment of compensation. Having regard to the contentions urged, the only question for consideration is whether the compensation awarded by the tribunal is adequate?

The Doctor who had treated the claimant was examined as PW-3. In his evidence he has given the details of the injuries sustained by her in the accident. He has stated that the claimant had suffered permanent disability at 37.5% to the left lower limb which has resulted in 13% disability to the whole body. 5% whole body disability due to fracture of pubic rami fracture. Thus, the total disability to the whole body is 18%. Having re-appreciated the entire evidence on record, I am of the view that the Court below ought to have assessed the permanent disability to the whole body at 15%.

Though, the claimant contends that she was earning Rs. 6,000/- per month, the same has not been established by her. It cannot be disputed that she was a vegetable vendor. The accident had occurred on 1.7.08.2008. Therefore, it is just and proper to hold that she was earning Rs. 150/- per day.

She was aged about 23 years at the time of the accident. The multiplier applicable to the case is 18. By taking the income of the claimant at Rs. 4,500/- per month with the application of multiplier 18 and 15% permanent disability to the whole body, the compensation payable towards loss of future earning comes to Rs. 1,45,800/-. She is entitled for a sum of Rs. 13,500/- towards loss of income during laid up period (three months earning). The award of compensation towards pain and agony and ''medical expenses'' in a sum of Rs. 30,000/- and 10,000/- respectively is just and reasonable. However, she is entitled for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- towards loss of future amenities.

Thus, the compensation payable to the claimant is reassessed as under:

The Court below has awarded total compensation of Rs. 1,00,200/- which has to be deducted from the aforesaid sum and the balance compensation payable to the claimant is Rs. 1,19,100/-. In the result, the appeal succeeds and it is accordingly allowed in part. The respondent - corporation is directed to pay compensation in a sum of Rs. 1,19,100/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The appellant is permitted to withdraw the said amount on its deposit. No costs.