Shakthi Kumar Vadhera vs United India Insurance Company Ltd.

N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal is by the claimant directed against the impugned judgment and award dated 05.09.2012 passed in MVC No. 2287/2008 on the file of the XVIII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member, MACT-4, Bangalore, (SCCH-4), (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short).

By its judgment and award, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 15,06,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realization as against the claim made by the appellant, on account of the grievous injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident.

It is case of the appellant/claimant that, he was aged about 37 years as on the date of accident, hale and healthy and working as commission agent and also businessman, earning Rs. 25,000/- per month. On 14.08.2007, at about 6.45 a.m. when the claimant was riding his motor cycle bearing registration No. KA-51-E-4387 at Jayanagar, 4th T block, 36th cross, 26th main junction, at that time, driver of the Tata Light goods vehicle bearing registration No. KA-03-8530 came with high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him, as a result, he lost control over the motor cycle and hit a tree and sustained grievous injuries. On account of the injuries, he undergone treatment for a period of 21 years and also undergone three surgeries. The claimant has examined the Doctor, who on clinical examination has assessed the permanent physical disability at 80% to the whole body. On account of the disability, he is not in a position to do his work as effectively as he was doing earlier. Taking all these factors into consideration, he filed a claim petition under Section 166 of MV Act before the Tribunal claiming compensation from the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal on consideration of oral and documentary evidence, has allowed the said claim petition in part and awarded a sum Rs. 15,06,000/- as compensation under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realisation. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant has presented this appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation.

The submission of learned counsel appearing for the appellant at the outset is that, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards injury, pain and sufferings, loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness, loss of income during laid up period, medical expenses and attendant charges. To substantiate the same, he is quick to point out that the claimant was aged about 37 years at the time of the accident, hale and healthy. He was businessman and commission agent, earning Rs. 25,000/- per month. The claimant has examined the Doctor as PW.4. The Doctor has opined that the claimant has suffered from extensive retroperitoneal haematoma with small bowel contusion, cerebral concussion with burst unstable fracture of L3-L4 vertebrae with transaction of spinal cord with paraplegia, right haemothorax with pulmonary contusion, multiple lacerated wounds and deep abrasion over the right leg and thigh and faciomaxillary region and both upper limbs and Hoffa''s fracture of right femur. He has assessed the permanent physical disability at 80% to the whole body. This aspect has not been considered by the Tribunal. The Tribunal ought to have assessed the disability at 100% to the whole body. It has also erred in not assessing the reasonable income. On account of the accident, the claimant has suffered mental pain and agony. He has to depend upon an assistant throughout his life to do his day to day activities. Therefore, he submits that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be modified awarding just and reasonable compensation.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent-insurer, inter alia, contended that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is just and proper and after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record. However, after going through the evidence of Doctor, he submitted that reasonable compensation may be awarded towards injury, pain and sufferings, loss of amenities, loss of future income in accordance with law.

After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both the parties and on 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 quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?"

Occurrence of the accident resulting in the grievous injuries to the claimant is not in dispute. Further, it is not in dispute that, he was aged about 37 years as on the date of accident, hale and healthy. He was businessman and commission agent, earning Rs. 25,000/- per month. He has suffered from extensive retroperitoneal haematoma with small bowel contusion, cerebral concussion with burst unstable fracture of L3-L4 vertebrae with transaction of spinal cord with paraplegia, right haemothorax with pulmonary contusion, multiple lacerated wounds and deep abrasion over the right leg and thigh and faciomaxillary region and both upper limbs and Hoffa''s fracture of right femur. The Doctor has assessed the permanent physical disability at 80% to the whole body. He also stated that the claimant has suffered bilateral paraplegia-complete permanent bowel and bladder disorder. Having regard to the same, we reassess the permanent disability at 100% instead of 80%. The Tribunal has rightly assessed the income at Rs. 6,000/- per month and is accepted. On account of the injuries sustained, he undergone three surgeries, and took treatment for a period of 21 days as inpatient in the hospital. On account of the injuries, he suffered mental pain and agony. He requires some amount towards future medical expenses. Taking all these factors into consideration, we deem it fit to award a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- towards injury, pain and sufferings, Rs. 1,00,000/- towards loss of amenities, Rs. 10,80,000/- (Rs. 6,000/- x 12 x 15 x 100%) towards loss of income on account of disability and Rs. 2,00,000/- towards future medical expenses.

The Tribunal has rightly awarded Rs. 7,30,000/- towards medical and incidental charges. Therefore, interference by this Court is not called for.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, the appellant/claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 22,60,000/- as against Rs. 15,06,000/- and the break-up is as follows:

There will be enhancement of Rs. 7,54,000/-.

In the light of the facts and circumstances referred above, the appeal filed by the claimant is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 05.09.2012 passed in MVC No. 2287/2008 on the file of the XVIII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member, MACT-4, Bangalore, is hereby modified awarding a sum of Rs. 22,60,000/- as against Rs. 15,06,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realisation. There shall be enhancement of compensation of Rs. 7,54,000/-.

The respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 7,54,000/- with interest at 6% p.a, from the date of petition till the date of realisation, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Out of the enhanced compensation of Rs. 7,54,000/-, 50% with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank, in the name of the appellant for a period of five years and renewable for another five years, with liberty to him to withdraw the interest accrued on it.

The remaining 50% with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant, immediately, on deposit by the respondent-Insurer.

Office to draw the award, accordingly.