AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B. Sreenivase Gowda, J.—Heard.
The appeal is admitted and with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal.
The brief facts of the case:
On 28.07.2005, when the claimant was travelling as a passenger in an autorickshaw bearing registration No. KA-20-4785 from Bharath Beedi Works Pvt. Ltd., Karkala Branch to her house situated near S.B. College, Karkala, the autorickshaw turtled due to rash and negligent driving. As a result, she fell down and sustained injuries. Hence, she filed a claim petition seeking compensation. The Tribunal awarded her a sum of Rs. 72.792/ - with interest at 6% p.a.
As there is no dispute regarding injuries sustained by the claimant in a motor road accident and the liability of the Insurance Company, the only point that arises for my consideration in the appeal is:
whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?
The learned Counsel appearing for the claimant submits that considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant and duration of treatment undergone by her, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and therefore he prays for allowing the appeal by enhancing the compensation.
Per contra, the learned Counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and there is no scope for enhancement and therefore he prays for dismissal of the appeal.
After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and perusing the judgment and award of the Tribunal, I am of the view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not just and proper, it is on the lower side and therefore it is deserved to be enhanced.
The claimant has sustained fracture of Tibia and fibula bone of her left leg as evident from the Wound Certificate Ex. P-9, X-ray report Ex. C-2 and are supported by the oral evidence of the claimant and the doctor, who were examined as PWs-1 and 2 respectively. She was treated as inpatient for a period of 8 days in Karkala Nursing Home, Karkala. PW-2, the doctor who treated the claimant has stated that there is disability of 7.5% to the whole body and she was doing beedi labeling work prior to the accident.
Considering the nature of injury Rs. 25,000/-awarded by the Tribunal towards ''pain and suffering'' is just and proper and it does not call for interference.
Rs. 25,016/- awarded by the Tribunal towards ''medical expenses'' is based on the medical bills produced by the claimant and there is no scope for enhancement.
Considering the duration of treatment, Rs. 2,800 awarded by the Tribunal towards ''convenience, nourishment and attendant charges'' is on the lower side and it is deserved to be enhanced by another Rs. 2,200/- and therefore I award Rs. 5,000/-under this head.
Although it has come in the evidence of the claimant that she was earning by doing beedi work and after sustaining injury, she could not have resumed to work for a period of 3 months. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards ''loss of income during laid up period''. The nature of injury suggests that she must have been out of employment atleast for a period of 3 months. It is just and proper to assess her income at Rs. 3,000/- per month and award Rs. 9,000/- towards ''loss of income during laid up period''
The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 14,976/-towards ''future loss of income'' by assessing the disability at 3% Whereas, PW-2 doctor has stated that the claimant has suffered disability of 7.5% to the whole body and if that is (sic), the loss of income works out to be Rs. 43,200/- (3000x12x16x7.5/100) and it is awarded as against Rs. 14,976/- awarded by the Tribunal.
Despite, awarding ''future loss of income'', the claimant has to bear with certain amount of disability, discomfort and inconvenience in her future life and no amount is awarded by the Tribunal towards ''loss of amenities'' and therefore, it is just and proper to award Rs. 15,000/- under this head.
RS. 5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards ''future medical expenses'' is on the lower side and it is deserved to be enhanced by another Rs. 5,000/- and 1 award Rs. 10,000/- under this head.
Thus, the claimant in all is entitled for a total compensation of Rs. 1,32,216/- as against Rs. 72,792/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% p.a. on the enhanced compensation of Rs. 59,424/-from the date of the claim petition till the date of realisation. The break up is as follows:
a) Pain and sufferings - Rs. 25,000/- b) Medical expenses - Rs. 25,016/- c) Conveyance, nourishment and Attendant charges - Rs. 5,000/- d) Less of income during the laid-up period - Rs. 9,000/- e) Loss of amenities - Rs. 15,000/- f) Future loss of income - Rs. 43,200/- g) Future medical expenses - Rs. 10,000/- Total Rs. 1,32,216/-
The claimant is entitled for an additional/enhanced compensation of Rs. 59,424/- with an interest of 6% p.a. from the date of the claim petition till the date of realisation excluding delayed period of 263 days and on the future medical expenses.
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment and award.
Out of the enhanced compensation, 75% of the amount with proportionate interest is ordered to be invested in fixed deposit in any Nationalised Bank/Scheduled Bank/Post Office for a period of 7 years. Remaining 25% with proportionate interest is ordered to be released in favour of the claimant immediately after the deposit.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated hereinabove. No order as to costs.