Ravi vs The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimant-appellant for enhancement of compensation is directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 16/12/2005, passed in MVC No. 160/2003, by the IX Additional Judge and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-7, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore (SCCH-7), (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short).

The Tribunal, by its judgment and award has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization as against the claim of Rs. 6,00,000/-, on account of the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident.

In brief, the facts of the case are:

"The appellant claims to be aged about 31 years at the time of the accident. He was hale and healthy prior to the accident, working as Contractor and Cable Operator and earning Rs. 10,000/- per month. That on 21.6.2002 at about 11.15 p.m. appellant was proceeding on motor cycle as a pillion rider along with his friend Ravi Raj on Armugam Circle, Basavanagudi. At that time, the driver of one car bearing Reg. No. KA.04.Z.809 came with high speed in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motor cycle on which appellant was proceeding. Due to which, appellant fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, he was taken to Venkateshwara Hospital, took treatment as inpatient for 70 days, underwent surgery, implants were inserted 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 the injuries sustained by the appellant in the said accident, he has suffered permanent disability. The Doctor has assessed the physical disability at 45% to left lower limb and at 15% to the whole body. 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. 1,20,000/- as compensation under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization.

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

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

It is the case of the appellant as made out in the memorandum of appeal that, the Tribunal has erred in not assessing the income of the appellant reasonable and also not considered the fact that, on account of the injuries sustained by the appellant, he has taken treatment as inpatient for more than 41 days, undergone surgery, implants were inserted and thereafter, he has taken bed rest and follow up treatment, during the said period, he has spent considerable amount towards medical expenses, conveyance and other incidental charges. Further, it is the case of the appellant that, he was working as cable operator and Contractor and earning Rs. 10,000/- per month and on account of injuries sustained by him, he has suffered permanent disability. The Doctor has assessed the disability at 45% to left lower limb and at 15% to the whole body. But the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards injury, pain and suffering, towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges, towards loss of income during treatment period, towards loss of amenities, discomforts and unhappiness, towards loss of future earnings and what is awarded is inadequate and it requires to be enhanced reasonably. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified by enhancing the compensation reasonably under all the heads.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for insurer, inter- alia, contended and submitted that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and 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 and the percentage of disability and therefore, it does not call for interference.

After going through the grounds urge din the memorandum of appeal and after hearing the learned counsel appearing for insurer and after perusal of the material available on record, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for our consideration is:

"Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?"

The occurrence of the accident and the resultant injuries sustained by the appellant are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that, appellant was aged about 31 years and working as Contractor and cable operator. It is the case of the appellant that he was earning Rs. 10,000/- per month. Having regard to the age and occupation of the appellant and the year of accident, we re-assess his income at Rs. 5,000/- per month in view of non production of credible documents to prove his income to meet the ends of justice. On account of type II compound fracture of lateral mallelous and medial mallelous apart from fracture of left fibula sustained in the accident, he has taken treatment as inpatient for 41 days, underwent surgery and implants were inserted. During the said period, he might have undergone lot of pain and agony, he might have spent considerable amount towards medical expenses, conveyance and other incidental expenses, and as per the advise of the Doctor he might have taken bed rest and follow-up treatment atleast for six months, during the said period, he might have incurred financial loss as he could not have attended his work regularly. Further, it is the case of the appellant that, on account of grievous injuries sustained by him in the accident, he has suffered permanent disability. To prove the same, he examined the Doctor as PW2, who after clinical examination has assessed the permanent disability at 45% to left lower limb and at 15% to the whole body and we accept the same. Discomforts and unhappiness persists through out his life, due to which he cannot walk, run climb stairs and it would affect his happiness in future life and also affects his earning capacity. Therefore, appellant has to be compensated reasonably. The proper multiplier applicable is ''16'' as rightly adopted by the Tribunal since appellant was aged about 31 years as on the date of the accident. Taking all these aspects into consideration, we award a sum of Rs. 50,000/- towards injury, pain and suffering as against Rs. 30,000/-, Rs. 10,000/- towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges as against Rs. 5,000/-, Rs. 30,000/- towards loss of income during the treatment period at the rate of Rs. 5,000/- per month for six months as against Rs. 10,000/-, Rs. 1,44,000/-( Rs. 5,000/- x 12 x 16 x 15%) towards loss of future earnings as against Rs. 25,000/- and Rs. 40,000/- towards loss of amenities, discomforts and unhappiness as against Rs. 10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

The Tribunal after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file has justified in awarding a sum of Rs. 40,000/- towards medical expenses and therefore, it does not call for interference.

In all, the appellant is entitled to the total compensation of Rs. 3,14,000/- instead of Rs. 1,20,000/-and the break- up is as follows:

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 16/12/2005, passed in MVC No. 160/2003, by the IX Additional Judge and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-7, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore (SCCH-7), stands modified, awarding the compensation of Rs. 3,14,000/- instead of Rs. 1,20,000/- as awarded by the Tribunal. There would be an enhancement of Rs. 1,94,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization.

The first respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,94,000/- with interest at 6% 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 and award.

Immediately on such deposit by the Insurer, out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 1,94,000/-, a sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- 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 05 years and renewable by another 05 years, with liberty reserved to the appellant to withdraw the interest accrued on it, periodically.

The remaining sum of Rs. 94,000/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant immediately.

Draw the award, accordingly.