AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K.Patil
This appeal by the claiman- is directed against the judgment and award. dated 2nd February 2010 passed in MVC No. 1668/2005 by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Puttur, D.K, (for short, `Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs.4,14,600/- with interest @ 6% p.a. awarded in favour of the claimant as against his claim for Rs.18,00,000/-, is inadequate. The appellant claims to be aged about 24 years and working as a Coolie labour earning a sum of Rs.6,500/- per month and was hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That the occurrence of accident at about 10:45 A.M, on 15-08-2005, near Old. Bus Stand on Sullia -Putter State High way, on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of a Private Mini Bus bearing No.1(A-21/E163 is not in dispute It is also not in dispute that, the appellant has sustained four grievous injuries, out of which, injury Nos.2 and 3 are grievous in nature and injury nos.1 and 4 are simple in nature. Due to the injuries sustained in tic accident, she was shifted to Government Hospital, Sulia and thereafter to District Wenlock Hospital, Mangalore, where.7.-ihe was admitted as in-patient.
It is her further case that, on account of the accident, she sustained injuries stated above and for the treatment of the said injuries, she has spent reasonable amount towards conveyance, rioutishing food and attendant charges including medical expenses and other incidental expenses and therefore, she has to be compensated reasonably.
On account of the injuries sustained in the accident, the appellant filed the claim petition u/s 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, before the Tribunal, seeking compensation of a sum of Rs18,00,000/- against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 2'' February, 2010. The Tribunal, after considering the relevant material available of file and after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part, awarding a sum of Rs.4,14,600/- under different heads, with interest at 6% per annum on Rs.4,04,600/-, from the date of petition till the date of realization. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant is in appeal before this Court, seeking enhancement of compensation.
I have gone through the grounds urged in the memorandum of appeal and the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal and heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the Insurer.
After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the Insurer and after going through the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal, I am of the view that, the Tribunal, after assessing the oral and documentary evidence available on file, has rightly awarded compensation of Rs.70,400/- towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges. Hence it does not call for interference. However, so far as other heads are concerned, the Tribunal erred in not awarding reasonable compensation and therefore, it requires enhancement.
After perusal of the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal, it can be seen that the appellant has sustained two grievous injures and two simple injuries. PW2, Doctor has clearly stated in the Disability Certificate that the appellant is not able to walk, stand, sit cross legged and squat and she is not able to do her activities of daily living. She has permanent disability and it amounts to 60% of function, whole body. But, the Tribunal, has erred in reassessing the disability at 50%. The same is just and proper, having regard to the age, avocation, nature of injuries sustained and the facts and circumstances of the case. Further, the monthly income of Rs.3,000/- assessed by Tribunal is also just and proper and I accept the same. For the age of the appellant, the proper multiplier applicable is ''17'' as per the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court in Sarin Vernta''s case (2009 ACJ 1298). Admittedly, due to the injuries sustained in the accident, the appellant was inpatient in the Hospital for some period. During the period of treatment, the appellant must have undergone lot of unsaid pain and agony. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained, I presume that she should have taken bed rest and follow-up treatment at least for a period of twelve months. Further, during the period of treatment, she would have spent reasonable sum towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges apartment from incidental and medical expenses. Therefore, having regard to the nature of injuries sustained, age, avocation and the nature and duration of treatment, I award a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- towards loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness on account of disability; Rs.75,000/- towards pain and sufferings as against Rs.11,000/-; Rs.36,000/- towards loss of income during treatment period, at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per month for a period of twelve months as against 35,200/-; Rs.3,06,000/- towards loss of future income (i.e. Rs.3,000/-x 12x ''17'' x50/100) as against Rs.2,88,000/- and Rs.70,000/- towards future medical exponsts,s as against Rs.10,000/- awarded by Tribunal. Thus, the appellant or ail, would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.6,57,400/-, with interest at 6% per annum as against ils.4,14,600/- awarded by Tribunal, and the break up is as follows:
Towards Pairpand sufferings
Rs.
75,000/
Towards loss of figure income
Rs.3,06,000/-
Towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges
Rs.
70,400/
Towards loss of earning during treatment period
Rs.
36,000/
Towards loss of amenitEls, discomfort and
unhappiness
Rs.1,00,000/-
Towards future medical expenses
Rs.
70,000/
Total
Rs.6,57,400/-
In the light of the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, the appeal filed by appellant is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 2nd February 2010 passed in MVC No. 1668/2005 by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Putter, D.K, is hereby modified, awarding compensation of a sum of Rs.6,57,400/-, with interest at 6% per annum, as against Rs.4,14,600/-, awarded by Tribunal. There would be all enhancement of compensation of Rs.2,42,800/- with 6% interest per annum.
The third respondent - Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation, with interest thereon at 6% per annum, from the date of petition till the date of realization, within three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment and award.
On such deposit by the insurer, a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- with proportionate interest shall be deposited in the name of the appellant in Fixed Deposit, in any nationalized or scheduled Bank, for a period of ten years, renewable for another ten years, with liberty reserved to the appellant to withdraw the periodical interest.
Remaining sum of Rs.67,800/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant, immediately.
Office to draw award, accordingly.