P. Naveen vs S.B. Manu and Branch Manager, The Oriental Insurance Co., Ltd.

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimant is directed against the judgment and award dated 29th November 2012, passed in MVC No. 161/2012, by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-V, Chitradurga, (for short, ''Tribunal''), for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 15,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. awarded in favour of the claimant as against his claim for Rs. 5,00,000/-, is inadequate. The appellant claims to be aged about 22 years and was hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That the occurrence of accident at about 6:00 P.M., on 26-12-2011, when the appellant was proceeding on a Motor Cycle bearing Registration No. KA-16/S-2798 as pillion rider, beyond Government Arts college, Chitradurga, due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the said Motor cycle, is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the appellant has sustained grievous injuries. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident, he was shifted to District Hospital, Chitradurga, where he took treatment as in-patient for one day and thereafter he was shifted to Kasturba Hospital, Manipal, where he took treatment as in-patient for a period of three days.

It is his further case that, on account of the accident, he sustained injuries, viz. contusion over occipital region of scalp and also head injury with right basifrontal contusion. For the treatment of the said injuries, he has spent reasonable amount towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges including medical expenses and other incidental expenses and therefore, he has to be compensated reasonably.

On account of the injuries sustained in the accident, the appellant filed the claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, before the Tribunal, seeking compensation of a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- against the Insurance Company and another. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 29th November, 2012. 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. 15,000/- under different heads, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant has filed the appeal before this Court, seeking enhancement of compensation.

I have gone through the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal and the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal and heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant.

Shri V.N. Jagadeesh, learned counsel appearing for appellant submits that the Tribunal grossly erred in awarding global compensation of only a sum of Rs. 15,000/- and the same is on the lower side for the reason that, in spite of the appellant producing wound certificate and medical bills amounting to a sum of Rs. 10,208/-, the Tribunal has awarded lesser compensation, totally disbelieving the medical bills at Exs. P21 and P22. Further, he submitted that the appellant has sustained contusion over occipital region of scalp and there is head injury with" right basifrontal contusion and that he is getting giddiness and hence, reasonable enhancement may be made and the impugned judgment/and award may be modified accordingly.

After perusal of the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal and after hearing the learned counsel for Insurer, I do not find any arbitrariness or unreasonableness in the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal. It reveals that the Tribunal has after assessing the oral evidence of PW 1 and documentary evidence at Exs. P1 to P30, has awarded global compensation of 15,000/-. Admittedly the claimant has sustained contusion over occipital region of scalp and also head injury with right basifrontal contusion. But, in order to prove the same, the appellant has neither examined the concerned Doctor who treated him nor produced the Disability Certificate, except producing the Wound Certificate. In all he has taken treatment as in-patient for a period of four days The Tribunal, after assessing the oral and documentary evidence available on file, assessing the notional income of the appellant, has recorded a specific finding of fact, holding that except the Wound Certificate issued by the District Hospital, Chitradurga, there is no other material on record to consider the consequences of the injuries. Having regard to the injury caused to head and the fact that the appellant was feeling drowsiness and giddiness and period of treatment, etc. and also the genuine medical bills, has awarded global compensation of a sum of Rs. 15,000/-. The same, in my view is just and proper for the injuries sustained by appellant and hence, it does not call for interference nor the appellant has made out a good case for such interference. Therefore, having regard to totality of the case on hand, I am of the view that the quantum of compensation awarded by Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for interference. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the claimant is liable to be dismissed as devoid of merits. Accordingly, it is dismissed.

Office to draw award, accordingly.