AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
H. Billappa, J.—This appeal is directed against the judgment and award, dated 10.04.2006, passed by the MACT-II, Mandya in MVC. No. 1249/2005.
By the impugned judgment and award, the Tribunal has granted compensation of Rs. 52,400/- with interest at 8% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of payment.
Aggrieved by that, the appellant has filed this appeal, seeking the enhancement.
In brief the facts are; that on 10.04.2001, at about 8.30 p.m., the appellant was going in a lorry bearing No. KA 17/2705, along with the other loaders, from Mandya to Besagarahalli. Near Brundavan Rice Mill, on Mandya-Besagarahalli road, the driver of the lorry drove it at high speed and lost control and the lorry turned turtle. As a result of that, the appellant sustained injuries. The appellant claimed compensation of Rs. 3,00,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 52,400/- with interest at 8% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of payment. Aggrieved by that, the appellant has filed this appeal, seeking enhancement.
The learned Counsel for the appellant contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and sufferings, medical expenses, loss of amenities of life, loss of future earnings and loss of income during the period of treatment is totally inadequate and therefore, needs to be modified.
As against this, the learned Counsel for the second respondent submitted that, the Tribunal on proper consideration of the material on record has awarded just and reasonable compensation and therefore, it does not call for interference.
I have carefully considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties.
The point that arises for my consideration is, whether the Tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation?
It is relevant to note, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards injuries, pain and sufferings. The appellant has suffered fracture of tibia and fibula and has taken treatment as inpatient for about 4 days. The injuries have resulted in the permanent disability. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 5,000/- towards injuries, pain and sufferings, which is inadequate. Having regard to the nature of the injuries, duration and nature of treatment, in my considered view, a sum of Rs. 20,000/- would be a reasonable sum towards injuries, pain and sufferings and accordingly, it is awarded.
The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 30,000/-towards loss of future earnings taking the income of the appellant at Rs. 2,000/- p.m. It has not adopted any multiplier. The appellant was aged 33 years at the time of the accident. Therefore, the appropriate multiplier is 16. The Doctor has deposed that the appellant has suffered permanent disability of 40% in respect of the limb. Therefore, disability in respect of the whole body can be taken at 13%. The appellant has deposed that he was earning Rs. 3,000/- p.m. by working as a loader and unloader. Therefore, the income of the appellant can be taken at Rs. 3,000/- p.m. Accordingly, it is taken. If the income of the appellant is taken as Rs. 3,000/- and the disability is taken at 13% and multiplier of 16 is adopted then, the compensation payable towards loss of future earnings comes to Rs. 49,920/-and accordingly, it is awarded.
The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 5,000/- towards loss of amenities of life. The appellant has suffered fracture of tibia and fibula and it has resulted in permanent disability of 40% in respect of the limb and the movement of left leg is restricted and the appellant limps while walking and there is shortening of left leg by 1.5 cms. The appellant has to suffer discomfort throughout his life. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 5,000/-towards loss of amenities which is inadequate. Having regard to the nature of discomfort the appellant has to suffer, in my considered view., a sum of Rs. 10,000/- would be reasonable towards loss of amenities in life and accordingly, it is awarded.
The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 400/- towards attendant charges. The appellant has taken treatment as inpatient for about 4 days and thereafter, follow-up treatment. Therefore, it is proper to award a sum of Rs. 2,000/- towards attendant charges and conveyance and accordingly, it is awarded.
The compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards future medical expenses and loss of income during the period of treatment is just and proper and therefore, it does not call for any interference.
The total compensation payable comes to Rs. 93,920/- and the break up is as follows:
Towards injuries, pain and sufferings - Rs. 20,000/- 2. Towards loss of future earnings - Rs. 49,920/- 3. Towards loss of amenities in life - Rs. 10,000/- 4. Towards future medical expenses - Rs. 4,000/- 5. Towards medical expenses - Rs. 5,000/- 6. Towards attendant charges and conveyance - Rs. 2,000/- 7. Towards loss of income during the period of treatment - Rs. 3,000/- Total - Rs. 93,920/-
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment and award, passed by the Tribunal in MVC. No. 1249/2005, stands modified, granting compensation of Rs. 93,920/- instead of Rs. 52,400/- with interest at 8% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realisation. The second respondent shall deposit the amount within eight weeks from today excluding the amount already deposited. 50% of the enhanced compensation shall be invested in fixed deposit in any nationalized bank for a period of three years. The appellant shall be entitled to withdraw the interest accrued on it. The balance amount shall be released in favour of the appellant.
Draw up the award, accordingly.