AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B.S. Indrakala, J.—Though the matter is posted for admission, with the consent of the learned Counsel for both parties, the same is taken up for final disposal.
This appeal is preferred against the common judgment and award dated 30.6.2009 passed in M.V.C. No. 1004/2007 along with other connected cases on the file of the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) and Addl. M.A.C.T, Udupi by the claimant therein.
The brief facts of the case leading to this appeal are as follows:
That, on 28.5.2007 at about 11.15 a.m., while the claimant along with others was traveling in the Maxi Cab bearing registration No. KA-20/5127 towards Udupi; when the driver of the Maxi Cab was driving the vehicle carefully and cautiously near Mooluru village panchayat on the National Highway, the bus bearing registration No. KA-19/D-3953, being driven by its driver in a rash manner in the process of overtaking another goods vehicle which was going ahead of the said bus, went and dashed against the Maxi Cab in which the claimant was traveling and caused the accident. It is further the case of the claimant that in the said accident, she sustained grievous injuries and at the time when she met with the accident, she was working as a beedi roller with an income of Rs. 150/- per day and after the accident, she cannot work as before; she also spent huge amount of money for treatment and hence sought compensation from the owner and insurer of both the vehicles.
In the statement of objection filed amongst other please it is pleaded by the respondents denying the cause of accident and the nature of injuries sustained, the income, age of the claimant etc., the insurer of both the vehicles pleaded admitting issuance of Policy for the relevant period to both the vehicles and further contended that liability, if any, is subject to terms and conditions of the Policy.
To prove her case, the claimant got examined herself as PW-7 and got marked Exs. P-27 to P-31. On behalf of the respondents, no oral evidence is adduced and no documents are also marked in particular, in this case.
On appreciating the said evidence so placed on record, the tribunal deemed it fit to award compensation of Rs. 30,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.
Aggrieved by the said passing of the judgment and award, the claimant is in appeal inter alia contending amongst other grounds that the amount so awarded is inadequate and seeks enhancement of the same.
The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the amount awarded under various heads is on the lower side, the tribunal failed to award any amount under the head ''loss of income during laid up period''. Even otherwise, the amount awarded in all is too inadequate and seeks enhancement of the same.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the second respondent - insurer of the bus which was involved in the accident submits that on the basis of the evidence placed on record, whatever amount the tribunal has awarded is just and proper and the same does not call for any enhancement.
Thus, the cause of accident and the claimant sustaining certain injuries in the said accident are not in dispute.
It is seen that as per the wound certificate marked as Ex. P-27, the claimant did sustain fracture of right temporal bone and right mandible. She was an in-patient in the Hi-Tech Hospital for two days. However, she continued her treatment as an outpatient thereafter. In the circumstances, it is reasonable to award a sum of Rs. 30,000/- towards ''pain and suffering''. The tribunal by considering the medical bills produced to an extent of Rs. 2,226/- has awarded Rs. 5,000/- in all, towards medical expenses and other incidental charges.
In this regard, it is to be seen that considering the nature of injuries though the claimant was inpatient only for two days, she required further medical treatment as out patient. In the circumstances, towards attendant charges, conveyance and nutritious food etc., and also including the medical bills so produced, it is reasonable to award a sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards both the medical and incidental expenses.
As on the date of accident, it is seen that the claimant was aged about 35 years and she was doing beedi rolling work. In the circumstances, her notional income can be fixed at Rs. 4,000/- p.m. Though the appellant was an inpatient for two days, considering the nature of injuries, it is reasonable to award ''loss of income during laid up period'' for two months at Rs. 8,000/-. The appellant is also entitled to be compensated under the head loss of amenities'' and it is just and proper to award a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards the same. Thus, the claimant in all, is entitled to be compensated at Rs. 53,000/- as against Rs. 30,000/- awarded by the tribunal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. Compensation of Rs. 30,000/- awarded by the tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 53,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.
The 2nd respondent - insurer is directed to deposit the amount so awarded within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on such deposit, the enhanced amount shall be released in favour of the appellant - claimant forthwith. Office to draw the award accordingly.