High CourtsSingle Bench(2011) 11 KAR CK 0034

Smt. Leelavathi vs M/s. New India Assurance Company Ltd. and Sri. N.Kumara Vel

Karnataka High Court · Decided on 3 November 2011

HON’BLE JUDGES
N.R. Patil, J
CASE NUMBER
M.F.A. No. 6049 of 2009 (MV)

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

13 paragraphs · 783 words

N.R. Patil

1.

This appeal by the claimant is directed against the common judgment and award dated 27th September 2008, passed in M.V.C. No. 8156/2005, by the Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-V, Bangalore, (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of `15,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. awarded in favour of the claimant as against her claim for `5,00,000/- , is inadequate.

2.

The appellant claims to be aged about 19 years and hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That the occurrence of accident at about 10:30 A.M. on 02-10-2005, when the appellant along with others was travelling in a bus bearing Registration No.KA-05/C-9622 from Bangalore to Bettadahindalapalya, near Jamalsabpalya on Magadi Huliyurdurga Main Road, due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the said bus, is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the appellant has sustained colle''s fracture right hand with fracture of lower 1/3rd of ulna and radius. Due to the said injuries sustained in the accident, she was shifted to Victoria Hospital for treatment.

3.

It is her further case that, on account of the injuries sustained in the accident, she has undergone severe pain and agony and for the treatment of the said injuries, she has spent reasonable; amount towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges including medical expenses and other incidental expenses and therefore, she has to be compensated reasonably.

4.

The Learned Counsel for appellant contends that the Tribunal is not justified in not awarding reasonable compensation and therefore, reasonable compensation may be awarded by modifying the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal.

5.

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 `5,00,000/- against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 27th September, 2008. The Tribunal, after considering the relevant material available on file and after appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part, awarding a global compensation of `15,000/- , with interest at 6% per annum 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.

6.

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 also Insurer.

7.

After careful perusal of the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal, it can be seen that the Tribunal, after assessing the oral and documentary evidence available on file, has awarded compensation of `15,000/- , with interest at 6% per annum/The same is on the lower side and needs to be enhanced. Admittedly, the appellant has sustained fracture to right hand with fracture lower 1/3rd of ulna and radius. She was aged about only 19 years at the time of accident. It is stated that she is working as coolie/mason, for which the hands are required to be intact. Here, she has sustained fracture to right hand itself, which is foremost: important. But, she has not examined the doctor with regard to disability. Therefore, having regard to the nature of injuries sustained, coupled with age, avocation and the year of accident, and also the fact that she cannot to do her work as effectively as she was doing earlier, I deem it fit to award a global compensation of a sum of `15,000/- , with interest at 6% per annum, in addition to the compensation awarded by Tribunal.

8.

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 common judgment and award dated 27th September 2008, passed in M.V.C.No.8156/2005, by the Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-V, Bangalore, is hereby modified, awarding compensation of a sum of `15,000/- , with interest at 6% per annum, from the date of petition till the date of realization, in addition to the compensation awarded by Tribunal.

The first respondent - Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of `15,000/- , 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, the entire sum shall be released in favour of the appellant, immediately.

Office to draw award, accordingly.