Manjunatha G. vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and S. Pubeshkumar

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimant-appellant is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 01/08/2011 passed in MVC No. 432/2010, by the I Additional Small Causes Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-11), (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal for short). By its judgment and award, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,60,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from 23.1.2010 till realization, on account of the injuries sustained by the claimant in the road traffic accident.

In brief, the facts of the case are:

That on 1.11.2009 at 10.00 a.m. on Bangalore Mysore road, near Eagle Tun cross, Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagar Taluk, the driver of the car bearing Reg. No. KA.03.C.2330 drove the same in high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the appellant. Due to which, appellant fell down and sustained fracture of pubic rami and other injuries all over the body as per Ex. P5-wound certificate. For that, he has taken treatment in Subhas Hospital, as inpatient for three days and thereafter, on the advise of the Doctor, he has taken bed rest and follow-up treatment.

It is the further case of the appellant that, he spent considerable amount towards medical expenses, conveyance and other incidental charges. Due to the injuries sustained by the appellant, he has suffered permanent disability. The Doctor, PW2 has assessed the disability at 25% to the whole body and it is permanent in nature. Therefore, appellant has filed a claim petition before the Tribunal u/s 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the respondents.

The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, in turn, after hearing both sides and after assessing the oral and documentary evidence, has allowed the said claim petition in part and awarded a sum Rs. 1,60,000/- as compensation under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from 23.1.2010 till its realization. Being dis-satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, appellant has presented this appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for appellant and learned counsel appearing for Insurer.

Learned counsel for the appellant, at the outset submitted that, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards loss of future income and what is awarded is inadequate and it requires to be enhanced by modifying the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.

As against this, learned counsel for the Insurer, inter-alia, contended and substantiated that the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and therefore, it does not call for interference. However, he has not disputed that the amount awarded towards loss of future income is inadequate and submitted that it may be considered in accordance with law.

After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and after perusal of the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, it emerges that, the occurrence of the accident and the resultant injuries sustained by the appellant are not in dispute. Further, it is not in dispute that appellant was aged about 35 years and to prove the injuries sustained and the permanent disability suffered by him, he has examined the Doctor as PW2, who has assessed the disability at 23.4% to the particular limb and 12% to the whole body. But the Tribunal has erred in assessing the permanent disability at 5% to the whole body. Therefore, having regard to the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant and in view of the evidence of the Doctor, PW2, I re-assess the permanent disability at 10% to the whole body instead of 5% assessed by the Tribunal. The appellant is aged about 35 years and proper multiplier applicable is ''16'' as rightly adopted by the Tribunal. However, the income of the appellant assessed by the Tribunal at Rs. 4,000/- per month is just and reasonable and I accept the same. Accordingly, I award a sum of Rs. 76,800/- towards loss of future income instead of Rs. 40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

However, the Tribunal after considering the material available on record, has justified in awarding a sum of Rs. 40,000/- towards pain and sufferings, Rs. 40,000/- towards loss of happiness and future amenities, Rs. 12,000/- towards loss of income during treatment period, Rs. 18,000/- towards incidental charges and a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards medical expenses and therefore, it does not call for interference. Thus, in all, the appellant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 1,96,800/- instead of Rs. 1,60,000/-. There would be an enhancement of Rs. 36,800/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization.

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part.

The impugned judgment and award dated 01/08/2011 passed in MVC No. 432/2010, by the I Additional Small Causes Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Bangalore (SCCH-11), stands modified, awarding the compensation of Rs. 36,800/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization, in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

The Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation with interest, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The enhanced compensation with interest shall be released in favour of the appellant, immediately, on deposit by the Insurer.

Draw the award, accordingly.

Learned counsel Sri. M.U. Poonacha is permitted to file vakalath for R1-Insurer, within four weeks from today.