Ravi vs The Managing Director, K.S.R.T.C.

N.K. Patil, J.—This is a claimant''s appeal for enhancement of compensation against the impugned judgment and award dated 23/08/2013, passed in MVC No. 907/2012, by the Member, Principal Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-1), (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short), on the ground that a sum of Rs. 4,21,540/- awarded with interest at 6% p.a. excluding interest on Rs. 10,000/-, from the date of petition till its realization, as against the claim of Rs. 22,00,000/-, on account of the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident is inadequate.

In brief, the facts of the case are:

The appellant claims to be aged about 22 years at the time of the accident. He was hale and healthy prior to the accident, working as agricultural coolie and earning Rs. 9,000/- per month. It is the case of the appellant that, on 17.11.2011 at about 4.00 p.m. was traveling as a pillion rider in a Motor cycle bearing Reg. No. KA. 42.H.3161 along with rider Lokesh from Kanakapura on the left side of the road and when they came infront of Afzal House, Thimmasandra, Kanakapura taluk, at that time, the driver of KSRTC bus bearing Reg. No. KA.40.F.017 came from behind with high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him and caused the accident. Immediately after the accident, appellant was shifted to Government Hospital, Kanakapura, after first aid, he was referred to Sanjay Gandhi Hospital, Bangalore, where he took treatment as inpatient, undergone surgery for amputation of left leg below knee and thereafter, on the advise of the Doctor, he has taken bed rest and follow up treatment.

It is the further case of the appellant that, he spent considerable amount towards medical expenses, conveyance and other incidental charges. On account of amputation of left leg below knee due to the injuries sustained by the appellant in the said accident, he has suffered permanent disability. Therefore, appellant has filed a claim petition before the Tribunal 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. 4,21,540/- as compensation under different heads with interest at 6% p.a. excluding interest on Rs. 10,000/- awarded towards future medical expenses from the date of petition till its realization.

Being dis-satisfied with the quantum of compensation and the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant has presented this appeal.

We have gone through the grounds urged by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant in the memorandum of appeal and heard learned counsel appearing for respondent-Corporation.

It is the contention of the appellant as made out in the memorandum of appeal that, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards injury, pain and sufferings, towards loss of income during treatment period, towards loss of future income and towards future medical expenses and what is awarded is inadequate and it is liable to be enhanced. It is further contended that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding any compensation towards loss of amenities, discomforts and unhappiness and therefore, it is liable to be awarded in accordance with law. Further, it is the contention of the appellant that, the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the appellant at Rs. 4,500/- per month which is on the lower side and is liable to be enhanced reasonably, on the ground that, accident was occurred in the year 2011, appellant was aged about 22 years and working as agricultural coolie and earning Rs. 9,000/- per month and therefore, he contended that the income of the appellant may be reassessed at Rs. 6,000/- to Rs. 6,500/- per month. Further, it is contended that the Tribunal has erred in assessing permanent disability at 30% and it ought to have assessed the disability at 60 to 70% to the whole body on the ground that, left leg of the appellant was amputated below knee middle 1/3rd and erred in not awarding any compensation towards purchase of artificial limb and that the rate of interest awarded is also on the lower side. Therefore, he prayed that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified by enhancing the compensation reasonably under all the heads.

Learned counsel appearing for respondent-Corporation submitted that, the Tribunal after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and taking into consideration the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, nature and duration of treatment taken by him and the percentage of disability suffered, has justified in awarding reasonable compensation under all the heads and therefore, it does not call for interference.

After going through the grounds urged by the appellant in the memorandum of appeal, after hearing the learned counsel appearing for Corporation and after perusal of the materials available on record, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for our consideration is:

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

Occurrence of the accident and the resultant injuries sustained by the appellant as per Ex. P4-wound certificate are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that, appellant was aged about 22 years at the time of the accident and working as agricultural coolie. On account of crush injury sustained by him in the accident, his left leg was amputated below knee and middle 1/3rd and therefore, we re-assess the permanent disability at 50% to the whole body instead of 30% as assessed by the Tribunal. Having regard to the age, occupation and year of the accident, we re-assess the income of the appellant at Rs. 6,000/- per month to meet the ends of justice instead of Rs. 4,500/- per month as assessed by the Tribunal.

Admittedly, on account of the grievous injuries sustained by the appellant, he has taken treatment as inpatient for 71 days, underwent surgery for amputation of left lower limb below knee and middle 1/3rd and thereafter, on the advise of the Doctor, he might have taken bed rest and follow up treatment at least for four months and during the said period, he might have undergone lots of pain and agony, he might have sustained financial loss, as he could not have attended his work regularly. As the appellant has suffered 50% disability, he has to suffer the same through out his life and it would affect his working capacity and he has lost his amenities and enjoyment in future life. As there was an amputation of knee, appellant has to replace the artificial limb once in three years and for that he may require some amount. The proper multiplier applicable would be ''18'' as rightly adopted by the Tribunal since appellant was aged about 22 years as on the date of the accident and we accept the same. Taking all these aspects into consideration and after re-appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file, we award a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- towards injury, pain and suffering as against Rs. 30,000/-, Rs. 20,000/- towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges as against Rs. 17,100/-, Rs. 24,000/- towards loss of income during the period of treatment for four months at the rate of Rs. 6,000/- per month as against Rs. 10,650/-, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of amenities, discomforts and unhappiness, Rs. 6,48,000/- ( Rs. 6,000 x 12 x 18 x 50%) towards loss of future earnings as against Rs. 2,91,600/-, Rs. 75,000/- towards future medical expenses including purchase of artificial limb as against Rs. 10,000/-.

However, the Tribunal has justified in awarding a sum of Rs. 62,190/- towards medical expenses as per medical bills produced by the appellant and therefore, interference by this Court is not called for.

In all, appellant is entitled to the total compensation of Rs. 10,79,190/- instead of Rs. 4,21,540/- awarded by the Tribunal and the break-up is as follows:

Regarding rate of interest, as rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, 6% interest per annum awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side, since the accident is of the year 2011. In the light of the judgment of Apex Court and this Court, we award the rate of interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till its realization on the enhanced compensation instead of 6% awarded by the Tribunal.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 23/08/2013, passed in MVC No. 907/2012, by the Member, Principal Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-1), stands modified, awarding the compensation of Rs. 10,79,190/- instead of Rs. 4,21,540/-. There would be an enhancement of Rs. 6,57,650/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization.

The respondent - Corporation is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 6,57,650/- with interest at 9% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Immediately on such deposit by the respondent-Corporation, out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 6,57,650/-, a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized or Scheduled or Grameena Bank in the name of the appellant for a period of 10 years and renewable by another 10 years, with liberty reserved to him to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.

The remaining sum of Rs. 1,57,650/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant, immediately.

Draw the award, accordingly.