M.Y. Abdul Lathif vs Jagadish Chandra Sharma and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimant-appellant is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 01/06/2010, passed in MVC No. 2090/2009, by the XI Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (SCCH-12), (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short).

By its judgment and award, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 3,78,500/- with interest at 6% p.a., excluding Rs. 15,000/- awarded towards future medical expenses from the date of petition till its payment, on account of the injuries sustained by the claimant in the road traffic accident.

In brief, the facts of the case are:

"The appellant was aged about 36 years at the time of accident and was hale and healthy prior to the accident. That on 13.2.2009 at about 11.30 a.m. appellant was riding his motor cycle bearing Reg. No. KA.01.ED.4079 on LIC road near coffee day, Basaveshwaranagar, Bangalore, along with pillion rider. At that time, all of a sudden, driver of the car bearing Reg. No. KA.02.MB.646 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle from behind. As a result, appellant and pillion rider were thrown out of the motorcycle and appellant sustained severe injuries and his motorcycle was badly damaged. Immediately, appellant was shifted to Panacea Hospital, Bangalore, wherein he took treatment as inpatient from 13.2.2009 to 17.2.2009, underwent surgery, implants were inserted and thereafter, on the advise of the Doctor, he has taken bed rest and follow-up treatment." 4. It is the further case of the appellant that, he has 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 has assessed the disability at 20% to the whole body and it is permanent in nature. Therefore, appellant has filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 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 hearing both sides and after assessing the oral and documentary evidence, has allowed the said claim petition in part and awarded a sum Rs. 3,78,500/- as compensation under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., except future medical expenses of Rs. 15,000/- from the date of petition till its payment. 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.

The submission of the learned counsel appearing for appellant, at the outset is that, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards injury, pain and sufferings, towards medical expenses including conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges, towards loss of amenities, discomforts and unhappiness and towards future medical expenses and what is awarded is in adequate and it requires to be enhanced. To substantiate the said submission, he submitted that, appellant was aged about 36 years as on the date of accident, working as Specialist in Plaster of Paris designing at Construction work and earning Rs. 12,000/- per month and an income tax assessed. He further submits that, on account of the injuries sustained by him in the accident, he took treatment as inpatient for 7 days, underwent one surgery and implants were inserted. To prove the same, he examined the Doctor, who after clinical examination has assessed the disability at 20% to the whole body, he has to suffer this disability through out his life and it would affect his future happiness in life, earning capacity and he requires some amount for future medical expenses. But these aspects of the matter has not been considered or appreciated or awarded reasonable compensation. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be modified by enhancing reasonable compensation.

After hearing 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 as per Ex. P6-wound certificate are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that, appellant was aged about 36 years and earning Rs. 12,000/- per month by working as Specialist in Plaster of Paris designing at Construction work and hale and healthy prior to the accident. Further it can be seen that, on account of the injuries sustained by the appellant, he has taken treatment for 7 days as inpatient, underwent surgery, implants were inserted. During the said period, he might have undergone lot of pain and agony and might have spent reasonable amount towards medical expenses, conveyance and other incidental charges. Further, it can be seen that, on account of fracture of fibula and clavicle he has suffered permanent disability. To prove the same, he examined the Doctor as PW2, who has assessed the disability at 20% to the whole body and deposed that there is swelling and tenderness over upper third of left leg and there is a shortening of left leg by 2 cms. Discomforts and unhappiness persists and he has to suffer this disability throughout his life and he may require some amount towards future medical expenses. But these aspects of the matter have not been considered or appreciated by the Tribunal while awarding compensation under these heads. Taking all these aspects into consideration, I award a sum of Rs. 75,000/- towards pain and sufferings instead of Rs. 40,000/-; Rs. 60,000/- towards medical expenses, including conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges instead of Rs. 56,400/-, Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of amenities of life, discomforts and unhappmess instead of Rs. l5,000/- and Rs. 20,000/- towards future medical expenses instead of Rs. 5,000/-.

However, a sum of Rs. 36,000/- and Rs. 2,16,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of income during treatment period and towards loss of future earnings is just and reasonable and therefore, interference by this Court is uncalled for. In all, the appellant is entitled to the compensation of Rs. 4,57,000/- instead of Rs. 3,78,500/-. There would be an enhancement of Rs. 78,500/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization and the break up is as follows:

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is allowed in part and the impugned judgment and award dated 01/06/2010, passed in MVC No. 2090/2009, by the XI Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (SCCH-12), stands modified, awarding the compensation of Rs. 78,500/- 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.