Ratnabai vs The Managing Director Vrl Logistics Ltd.

A.S. Pachhapure, J.—Though the matter is listed today for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

The appellant dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the injuries sustained by her in a motor vehicle accident, has filed this appeal, seeking enhancement.

The facts relevant for the purpose of this appeal are as under:

It is on 6.10.2010 on National Highway No. 13 near Petrol Pump and Sindagi bypass road, while the appellant was going on the side of the road, lorry bearing registration No.KA-25 B-6712 driven in a rash and negligent manner hit a cyclist and then the appellant. Due to the impact, she sustained grievous injuries and was treated in the hospital. Her left leg below knee was amputated. So also her bones of the right leg were fractured and she is said to have sustained 100% disability. In the circumstances, she made a claim for compensation for pain and suffering, mental agony, medical expenses etc. Her claim petition in MVC No. 2035/2010 was clubbed with other cases and common evidence was permitted. On behalf of the claimants PWs. 1 to 5 were examined, in their evidence Exs. P1 to P21 were marked. The Tribunal on appreciation of the evidence on record allowed the claim petition of the appellant in part and granted a sum of Rs. 9,34,000/- with interest at 6% per annum. Dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded, the present appeal is filed.

I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties.

The point that arises for my consideration is,

Whether the appellant is entitled to enhanced compensation? If so, to what extent?

Learned counsel for the appellant having kept appellant present before this Court submitted that there is 100% disability and the appellant has to move only on a wheel chair. In the circumstances he submits that the compensation granted on each of the heads is on the lower side. He also submits that the income assessed by the Tribunal is meager and it needs enhancement. He submits that even in the later period medical expenses were incurred by the appellant for the treatment and it is necessary to grant the reasonable compensation on each of the heads.

On the other hand, Shivanand Patil, the learned counsel for the insurer supporting the judgment and award of the Tribunal submits that just compensation has been granted by the Tribunal.

The observation of the appellant who is present before the Tribunal indicates a pathetic condition due to the injuries sustained in the accident. Her left leg just below the knee has been amputated and her right leg as well is of no use. She is on the wheel chair. She cannot walk on her own even with the assistance of anybody. She has to use the wheel chair in her major portion of her life time.

Perusal of the injury certificate at Ex. P10 would reveal the fracture of acetabulum , hip bones, fracture of bones of the right leg and there is amputation of left lower limb below knee and the doctor who is examined as PW5 has assessed the disability at 100% to the whole body. This evidence which is placed on record supports even the observation made by this Court when the appellant was present. The appellant cannot earn anything in her life time because of the disability.

A sum of Rs. 60,000/- has been granted towards pain and suffering, mental agony. I think, she is entitled to Rs. 1,00,000/- on this head.

Tribunal on the basis of the material on record has granted a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- towards medical expenses. It is stated before the Court that the appellant has to undergo further surgery of the hip and taking into consideration the compensation granted towards medical expenses, I think, it would be just and proper to grant an additional sum of Rs. 75,000/- on this head.

Only a sum of Rs. 25,000/- has been granted towards loss of amenities. She is entitled to Rs. 1,00,000/-, as she cannot enjoy and be happy in her life time.

A sum of Rs. 20,000/- has been granted towards attendant, conveyance, food and nourishment etc. As the appellant needs the assistance of an attender all along her life and also nourishing food etc. I think she is entitled to Rs. 1,00,000/- on this head.

Towards loss of expectation of life a sum of Rs. 25,000/- has been granted. There is no need to enhance the same.

Assessing the income of the appellant at Rs. 3,000/- per month and adopting multiplier of ''14'', a sum of Rs. 5,04,000/- has been granted as compensation towards loss of future earnings.

She was a fruit vendor, as the accident is of the year 2010, I think it would be just and proper to accept her income as Rs. 4,500/-, as in the Lok-Adalats the income of a labourer is assessed at Rs. 4,500/- per month. Thereby, towards loss of future earnings, net compensation payable would be Rs. 7,56,000/- (4500x12x14), deducting a sum of Rs. 5,04,000/- awarded by the tribunal, she is entitled to Rs. 2,52,000/- as additional compensation. In the aforesaid circumstances, the additional compensation payable would be:

The appellant is entitled to the aforesaid sum with interest at 6% from the date of petition till its payment in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

Hence, the point is answered in affirmative.

Consequently, the appeal is allowed in part. The appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 5,22,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its payment, in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

Out the enhanced compensation, a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- shall be kept in her name in any nationalised Bank for a period of five years with liberty to withdraw the interest accrued on the deposit.