Mohaboob Pasha vs Anthony Raj C. and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the appellant/claimant is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 13th February 2013 passed in M.V.C. No. 6817/2011 on the file of the 14th Additional Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes (SCCH-10), Bengaluru City, (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short) seeking enhancement of compensation.

The Tribunal by its impugned judgment and award, has awarded a sum of Rs. 7,00,200/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization under different heads on account of the grievous injuries sustained by the appellant in the road traffic accident. The claimant has presented this appeal on the ground that the quantum of compensation and the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and requires enhancement.

It is the case of the appellant that, he was aged about 46 years at the time of accident, a two wheeler Mechanic by profession and also Proprietor of the Firm, repairing two wheelers and hale and healthy prior to the accident. Be that as it may, he met with an accident on 06.11.2011 at about 12.50 p.m. while he was proceeding on his Motor Cycle bearing Registration No. KA-03/J-185 from his residence towards his work place and when he was proceeding near Hebbal Fly Over, B.B. Road, Bangalore, slowly, cautiously in moderate speed by observing all traffic rules and regulations, at that time a Maruthi Swift Car bearing Registration No. KA-05/MF-5612 came from Bhoopasandra side at high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the appellant''s motor cycle. Due to the impact, he fell down and sustained multiple injuries. Immediately he was shifted to Bangalore Baptist Hospital, Hebbal, Bangalore, where he undergone treatment as inpatient from 06.11.2011 to 15.11.2011. On account of the grievous injuries sustained in the road traffic accident, the claimant filed a claim petition under Section 166 of M.V. Act before then Tribunal against the respondents claiming compensation.

The said matter had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal in turn after due consideration of oral and documentary evidence and other material available on record has assessed the income of the appellant at Rs. 48,000/- p.a. and 55% permanent disability to the whole body and awarded a sum of Rs. 7,00,200/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization. Being dissatisfied with the impugned Judgment and Award passed by the Tribunal, the appellant has presented this appeal on the ground that the quantum of compensation and rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and requires enhancement.

We have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent-Insurer.

Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, Sri. K.V. Shyamaprasada submitted that the Tribunal has committed grave error and injustice in not assessing reasonable income of the appellant as he was aged about 46 years at the time of accident, Mechanic and also running a Two Wheeler''s Garage being its Proprietor and sustained multiple injuries, paraplegia and his health condition is vegetable in nature. He has to depend upon one permanent assistant throughout his future life. Therefore, he submitted that the income of the appellant may be re-assessed atleast between Rs. 6,500/- and Rs. 7,000/- per month and taking into consideration the fact that the appellant has suffered mental pain and agony during the treatment period and permanent disability continues throughout his future life and has to suffer discomfort, frustration and unhappiness throughout his life and also affected marital life and there is chances of deterioration of urinary functions, because of grievous injuries sustained and he is not in a position to discharge urine in usual course. Therefore, he requires some reasonable compensation towards future medical expenses and attendant charges in order to engage the services of one assistant permanently. These aspects of the matter have not been looked into nor considered by the Tribunal nor awarded reasonable compensation. Therefore, he submits that the impugned Judgment and Award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be modified by awarding reasonable compensation and also the interest may be awarded at 9% p.a. to 10% p.a. as the accident is of the year 2011 following the judgments of Apex Court and this Court in accordance with law.

As against this, the learned Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent - Insurer Sri. R. Jayaprakash inter-alia contended and sought to substantiate that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is after due consideration of oral and documentary evidence and relevant material available on record and Tribunal is justified in awarding reasonable compensation. Therefore, interference by this Court is not called for. However, after going through the evidence of Doctor, he submits that, considering the nature of injuries sustained, duration of treatment undergone some reasonable amount may be awarded towards loss of amenities, discomfort, unhappiness, future medical expenses and attendant charges, in accordance with law.

After careful consideration of the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for consideration is:

"Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?"

Occurrence of the accident and the resultant grievous injuries sustained by the appellant in the road traffic accident are not in dispute. The appellant was aged about 46 years, Mechanic by profession running a two wheeler garage and the accident has occurred on 06.11.2011 which is also not in dispute. Having regard to the year of accident, age, avocation of the appellant, we can safely re-assess the income of the appellant at Rs. 6,000/- per month to meet the ends of justice on account of the multiple grievous injuries sustained by the appellant in the road traffic accident. The appellant had undergone treatment for a period of 20 days in the Hospital and he has examined the Doctor - PW-2. The Doctor on clinical and radiological examination has opined that the appellant has suffered neurological disability of 96.11%, final permanent physical impairment in neurological conditions, whole body disability at 96.11% and final a vocational disability (Irrespective of avocation) is also 96.11%.

After careful appreciation of the evidence of Doctor - PW-2 and having regard to the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant as stated supra, we can safely re-assess the permanent disability at 100%, to meet the ends of justice. The appellant has to endure the same for the rest of his life and he has to depend upon an assistant for the rest of his life. He also required some amount towards future medical expenses.

Taking all these aspects into consideration, we deem it fit to award Rs. 2,00,000/- towards injury, pain and suffering as against Rs. 1,00,000/-, Rs. 20,000/- towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges as against Rs. 3,000/-, Rs. 1,50,000/- towards loss of amenities and future discomforts as against Rs. 10,000/-, Rs. 9,36,000/- towards loss of future earning capacity as against Rs. 3,43,200/- (Rs. 6,000/- x 12 x 100 x 13/100), Rs. 1,50,000/- towards future medical expenses.

The Tribunal is justified in awarding Rs. 2,04,000/- towards medical expenses as per medical bills and the same is not called for interference by this Court.

Therefore, the appellant is entitled for total compensation under different heads as follows:

The appellant/claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs. 16,60,000/- as against Rs. 7,00,200/- awarded by the Tribunal. There would be enhancement of Rs. 9,59,800/-.

As rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at 6% p.a. is on the lower side. As the accident occurred in the year 2011, following the judgments of Apex Court and this Court in host of judgments, we deem it fit to award interest at the rate of 9% p.a. on the enhanced compensation from the date of petition till realization.

For the foregoing reasons, the instant appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 13th February 2013 passed in M.V.C. No. 6817/2011 on the file of the 14th Additional Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes (SCCH-10), Bengaluru City is hereby modified awarding additional compensation of a sum of Rs. 9,59,800/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.

The 2nd respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 9,59,800/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment and award.

Out of the enhanced compensation amount of Rs. 9,59,800/-, a sum of Rs. 8,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be deposited in the name of the appellant in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank or Grameena Bank, for a period of 10 years and renewable for 5 years and he is entitled to withdraw the periodical interest accrued on it.

The remaining amount of Rs. 1,59,800/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant immediately on deposit by the 2nd respondent - Insurer.

Draw the award, accordingly.