Maruti vs Annareddy

B. Sreenivas Gowda, J.—By consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, appeal is heard and disposed of finally at the stage of admission.

The appellant having sustained certain injuries in a road traffic accident, filed a claim petition before MACT, Basavakalyan seeking compensation from the owner and the insurer of the offending vehicle. The Tribunal, by impugned judgment, has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,15,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation. Aggrieved by the sum awarded by the Tribunal claimant has preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

As there is no dispute regarding certain injuries sustained by the claimant in the road traffic accident that occurred on 28.01.2009, due to rash and negligent driving of the offending lorry bearing Reg. No. KA-39/5069 by its driver and liability of the insurer of the said vehicle., the only point remains for consideration in this appeal is:

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

After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perusing the judgment and award of the Tribunal, we are of the view that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable and is on the lower side and therefore, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is deserved to be enhanced.

As per wound certificate Ex. P-3, the appellant-claimant has sustained the following injuries:

Multiple abrasions over face, both hands and legs, deep lacerated wound over left eye, soft tissue of eve was exposed.

Ex. P-9 discharge chard shows that the claimant was admitted in L.V. Prasad Eye Institute, Hyderabad on 01.02.2009 and was discharged on 05.02.2009 and has taken treatment for eye. Ex. P-10 certificate issued by Dr Dattatray P. Khalangre shows that he is having 30% of blindness in his eye. Injuries sustained and treatment undergone by him are also supported by the oral evidence of the appellant and the doctor who were examined as PW-1 and PW-2 respectively. PVV-2 has also stated in his evidence that appellant has suffered blindness to the extent of 30% to his left eye and he has suffered disability of 20% to the whole body.

Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, Rs. 50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering is on the lower side and therefore we enhance it by another Rs. 50,000/- and award Rs. 1,00,000/- under this head.

The appellant, in support of his contention that he has spent Rs. 5,00,000/- towards medical expenses, has not produced any documents establishing the said contention. In the absence of medical bills and prescription supporting the amount spent towards medical expenses, a sum of Rs. 10,000/- is awarded towards medical and incidental expenses as against Rs. 7,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

The claimant was working as a cleaner in a lorry and therefore his income is assessed at Rs. 4,500/- per month as against Rs. 3,000/- per month assessed by the Tribunal. Nature of injuries suggest that he must have been under rest and treatment for a period of four months. Therefore, a sum of Rs. 18,000/- is awarded towards loss of income during laid up period.

Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, disability stated by the doctor and an amount of discomfort and unhappiness that he has to suffer in his future life Rs. 15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of amenities, Rs. 10,000/- awarded towards loss of expectation of life and Rs. 25,000/- awarded towards disfiguration of face are just and proper and there is no scope for enhancement of compensation under the above heads.

Now we have assessed the income of the appellant at Rs. 4,500/-. The disability stated by the Doctor for the injuries sustained by him to eye is 20% to whole body. The multiplier applicable to the age group of the appellant is ''15''. So loss of future income works out to Rs. 1,62,000/- (Rs. 4,500 x 12 x 20/100 x 15) and it is awarded as against Rs. 1,08,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

Thus, the appellant is entitled to following compensation:

Thus the appellant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 3,40,000/- as against Rs. 2,15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal and is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation excluding interest for the delay period of 231 days in filing this appeal.

Accordingly, appeal is allowed in part and the Judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated herein above. The appellant is entitled to an additional compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization excluding interest for the delay period of 231 days in filing this appeal.

The insurance company is directed to deposit the additional compensation amount together with interest within 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. From out of the additional compensation amount, 75% with proportionate interest is to be invested in Fixed Deposit in the name of the claimant in any Nationalized bank/Scheduled Bank/Grameen Bank/Post Office for a period of 10 years with a right of option for the claimant to withdraw interest periodically. Remaining amount with proportionate interest is ordered to be released in his favour.

It is further made clear that the Tribunal while releasing the remaining amount in favour of claimant is also directed to issue FD slips to the claimant so that he can withdraw the FD amount on maturity and the Bank/the post office in which the FD will be invested is also directed to release FD on maturity without insisting for further orders from the Tribunal.

Office to draw up the award accordingly.

No order as to costs.