Master Kishoor vs The Managing Director, B.M.T.C.

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimant-appellant represented by his natural guardian, mother, is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 22/12/2011 passed in MVC No. 1433/2009, by the XII Additional Small Causes Judge and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (for short ''Tribunal''), for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, a sum of Rs. 52,500/- awarded by the Tribunal under different heads as against the claim of Rs. 3,00,000/-, on account of the injuries sustained by the minor appellant in the road traffic accident, is inadequate. The appellant claims to be aged about 10 years as on the date of the accident and he was hale and healthy prior to the accident. That on 30.8.2008 at about 1.00 p.m. one Nanjappa S/o. Dyavappa, driver of a BMTC bus bearing Reg. No. KA.01.FA.659 drove the same on the service road of Bangalore-Tumkur NH.4 High way road from west to east with high speed in a rash and negligent manner and near Sarojini Hospital, he dashed the said bus against the minor appellant who was standing at the bus stop waiting for the bus. Due to which, appellant sustained injuries as per Ex. P7-wound certificate. Immediately, he was taken to nearby Sarojini Hospital Bangalore treatment and after first aid, he was shifted to Bowring and Lady Curzon hospital, Bangalore, where he took treatment as inpatient from 1/9/2008 to 6/9/2008 undergone surgery and thereafter, he has taken bed rest and follow up treatment and spent considerable amount towards medical expenses and other incidental charges.

It is the further case of the appellant that, on account of the injuries sustained by him, he has suffered permanent disability and the Doctor has assessed the total disability at 18% to the lower limb and at 6% to the whole body. Therefore, he has filed a claim petition before the Tribunal through his natural guardian, mother, 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, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence and other material available on file, has allowed the claim petition in part, awarding the compensation of Rs. 52,500/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till realization. Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant has presented this appeal, through his natural guardian, mother, for enhancement of compensation.

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant, Sri. Ramachandra R. Naik, at the outset, submitted that, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards loss of amenities, discomforts and unhappiness, towards injury, pain and sufferings and in not awarding any compensation towards disability on account of the injuries sustained by him. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be modified by enhancing reasonable compensation. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant 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. It is also not in dispute that, in the accident, appellant has sustained lacerated wound at left ankle and as per the opinion of the Plastic Surgeon, there is skin avulsion 10 x 4 cms on medial aspect of ankle exposing tendons and muscles over medical malleolus left leg and it is grievous in nature. For that, he has taken treatment as inpatient from 1/9/2008 to 6/9/2008 as per Ex. P12-case sheet. The appellant has examined the Doctor who has treated him as PW2, who has assessed the disability at 18% to the lower limb and 6% to the whole body and the same has been accepted by the Tribunal. Further, it emerges that, the Tribunal, after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence, taking into consideration the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, the nature and duration of the treatment taken by him, the pain and sufferings undergone by him during that period, and amount spent towards medical expenses, conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges and assessing the notional income of the appellant Rs. 15,000/- per annum, and after assigning valid reasons, has awarded a sum of Rs. 20 000/- towards pain and sufferings, Rs. 8,000/- towards medical expenses, including conveyance, food and nourishment, Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of amenities, Rs. 6,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period, Rs. 13,500/- towards disability, in all, Rs. 52,500/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till realization, which is just and proper and therefore, it does not call for interference Nor I find any justification or good grounds as such made out by the appellant to entertain the relief sought in this appeal. Hence, the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed as devoid of merits. Ordered accordingly.