Master Kuruba Basker vs Arun Kumar M. and The Branch Manager, Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd.

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimant is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 16th March 2011, passed in MVC No. 8811/2009, by the IX Additional Senior Civil Judge, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-7, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 5,60,000/-, awarded in his favour as against his claim for Rs. 25,00,000/-, is inadequate. The appellant claims to be a minor boy aged about 6 at the time of accident and studying in I Standard and is represented by his father, natural guardian. He was hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That at about 4:00 P.M., on 27-03-2008, when the appellant was crossing the road at chinnaguddam palli near M. Birepalli Cross on Hindupur to Gorantla road to go to his grand father''s house, at that time, a Tata Indica Car bearing Registration No. KA-03/MB-1343 being driven by its driver at high speed in a rash and negligent manner, came from Hindupur side and dashed against the appellant. Due to the impact, the appellant sustained grievous injuries.

It is the case of the father of the appellant that he has spent considerable amount towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges including medical expenses and other incidental expenses and therefore, he has to be compensated adequately.

On account of the injuries sustained in the accident, the appellant, being minor, represented by his father, filed the claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, before the Tribunal., seeking compensation of a sum of Rs. 25.00 lakhs against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 16th March, 2011. The Tribunal, after considering the relevant material available on file and after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part, awarding a sum of Rs. 5,60,000/- with interest on Rs. 5,10,000/- at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant is in appeal before this Court, seeking enhancement of compensation.

Learned counsel appearing for appellant vehemently submitted that the appellant was aged about only 6 years at the time of accident and has sustained grievous injuries on account of road traffic accident and because of the same, he has lost his education and his marriage prospects are also grim and that he has sustained 100% permanent disability towards the particular limb, as deposed by the Doctor. Further, he submitted that he took treatment as in-patient for a period of four months on various occasions and also underwent a surgery. Therefore, the compensation awarded by Tribunal towards injury, pain and sufferings, loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness, loss of marriage prospects etc. is on the lower side and liable to be re-determined, by modifying the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal.

As against this, learned counsel appearing for second respondent/Insurer sought to justify the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal, stating that the same is passed after critical evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and also considering each and every aspect, the Tribunal has awarded compensation under all the heads including loss of education and loss of marriage prospects. Hence, interference in the well considered judgment and award is uncalled for.

We have heard learned counsel for appellant and learned counsel for second respondent/Insurance Company for considerable length of time.

After hearing learned counsel for the appellant and after perusal of the judgment and award passed by Tribunal including the original records placed before us, it can be seen that, the occurrence of accident and the resultant injuries sustained by appellant are not in dispute. As per the Wound Certificate and Discharge summary at Exs. P3, P4 and P5, it reveals that the appellant has sustained Type III B segmental compound open fracture of distal tibia with fracture of upper third of fibula and also crush injury over lower half of his leg over the fracture. It is also not in dispute that the appellant was aged just six years at the time of accident. He has also undergone a surgery. The Tribunal, after assessing the oral and documentary evidence available on file, has rightly awarded compensation of a sum of Rs. 1,25,000/- towards medical expenses, as per the medical bills and prescriptions, Rs. 70,000/- towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges, Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of education, Rs. 1,15,000/- towards loss of future income and Rs. 50,000/- towards future medical expenses. Hence, interference in the same is uncalled for.

However, so far as the compensation awarded under injury, pain and sufferings, loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness and loss of marriage prospects is concerned, the same is on the lower side and needs to be re-determined. Admittedly, in view of the road traffic accident, the appellant has sustained grievous injuries as above. Considering the nature of injuries sustained, the Doctor has assessed 100% disability in respect of the particular limb. The Tribunal, after assessing the oral and documentary evidence available on file and also the judgment of the Hon''ble Apex Court, re-assessed the whole body permanent disability at 50%. The same, in our opinion is just and proper and it is accepted, to meet the ends of justice. The appellant being aged about only 6 years, at the time of accident, has to endure this disability for the rest of his life. Because of the injuries sustained, his marriage prospects also is likely to be affected. Further, it is stated that the appellant took treatment as in- patent for quite a long period on account of the grievous injuries sustained. During this period, he must have undergone lot of unsaid pain and agony and also underwent a surgery and must have also spent reasonable sum towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges apart from incidental expenses. Therefore, having regard to the age, nature of injuries, nature and duration of treatment undergone, disability towards particular limb and also whole body disability and also the fact that the injured claimant is just aged about 6 years at the time of accident and other facts and circumstances of the case, we award a sum. of Rs. 1,50,000/- towards injury, pain and suffering as against Rs. 1,00,000/-; Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness as against Rs. 50,000/-; and Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of marriage prospects as against Rs. 25,000/- awarded by Tribunal. In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, the appeal filed by appellant is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 16th March 2011, passed in MVC No. 8811/2009, by the IX Additional Senior Civil Judge, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-7, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore, is hereby modified, awarding a sum of Rs. 6,85,000/- as against Rs. 5,60,000/- awarded by Tribunal, with interest at 6% per annum on the enhanced sum, from the date of petition till the date of realization. The break-up is as follows:

The total compensation would workout to Rs. 6,85,000/- as against Rs. 5,60,000/-. The enhanced compensation would be Rs. 1,25,000/- with 6% interest per annum.

The second respondent/Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,25,000/- with interest thereon at 6% per annum, within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment.

On such deposit by the Insurance Company, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the name of the appellant, in Fixed Deposit, in any scheduled/Nationalized Bank, till the appellant attains the age of 30 years, with liberty reserved to the father of appellant to withdraw the periodical interest till he attains 21 years, for his welfare and thereafter, he is entitled to receive the periodical interest.

Remaining sum of Rs. 25,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant, through his natural guardian, immediately.

Office to draw award, accordingly.