AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil
This appeal by the claimant is directed against the common judgment and award dated 7th July 2010 passed in MVC 1''109728/ 2008 by the XI Additional Judge, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, (for short, `Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 2,09,230/- with interest @ 6% p.a. awarded in favour of the claimant as against his claim for Rs. 3,50,000/-, is inadequate. The appellant claims to be aged about 38 years and hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That the occurrence of accident at about 1:30 P.M, on 17-09-2008, when the appellant along with another was going in a Motorcycle bearing Registration No. CTO-2715, at Peenya Industrial Area, near FFI Factory, 3rd Phase, Bangalore-58, due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of Tanker bearing No. KA-04/D-2772, is not in dispute, It is also not in dispute that the appellant has sustained concussive head injury with bifrontal hemorrhage, fracture of occipital bone, diffused cerebral edema and abrasion left temporal region and leg and the said injuries are grievous in nature. Due to the said injuries sustained in the accident, he was shifted to Srinivas Hospital.
It is his further case that, on account of the injuries sustained in the accident, he has undergone severe pain and agony and for the treatment of the said injuries, he has spent reasonable amount towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges including medical expenses and other incidental expenses and therefore, he has to be compensated reasonably.
The learned counsel for appellant contends that the Tribunal grossly erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards all the heads and hence, the compensation awarded is liable to be enhanced, by modifying the impugned judgment and award.
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 Rs. 3,50,000/- against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. on 7th July, 2010. 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 sum of Rs. 2,09,230/- under different heads, 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.
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.
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 erred in not awarding reasonable compensation. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident, the appellant was inpatient in the Hospitals for some days. During the treatment period., he would have spent reasonable amount towards conveyance nourishing food and attendant charges. PW3 Doctor has stated that the appellant was referred to the Neuro Surgeon for further treatment arid assessment of disability. He has assessed the whole body disability at 36%. During cross examination he has stated that he is working as Medico legal consultarit at Mallige Medical Centre and his duty is to issue Wound Certificate and to give treatment along with seniors in MLC cases. The appellant being aged about 38 years, has undergone this ordeal for no fault of him and due to the injuries sustained, it would be difficult for him to perform his day to day activities, as earlier. Therefore, having regard to the nature of injuries sustained, age and avocation of the appellant and nature and duration of treatment, and also the fact that he cannot to do his work as effectively as he was doing earlier, I deem it fit to award a global compensation of a sum of Rs. 50,000/-, with interest at 6% per annum, in addition to the compensation awarded by Tribunal. 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 7th July 2010 passed in MVC No. 9728/2008 by the XI Additional Judge, Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, is hereby modified, awarding compensation of a sum of Rs. 50,000/-, 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 Rs. 50, 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.