AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B. Sreenivase Gowda, J.—Heard.
Admitted and with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, this appeal is taken up for final disposal.
The claimant having sustained bodily injury in a motor road accident occurred on 22.01.2008 due to rash and negligent driving of Maruti omni vehicle filed a claim petition before the MACT, Bangalore seeking compensation of Rs. 4,00,000/-. The Tribunal awarded him a compensation of Rs. 1,90,657/- with interest at 8% p.a. Aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, he has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
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 him, 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 both bones of the right lower limb as evident from the Wound Certificate Ex. P-5, Discharge summaries Exn. P-7 and 8, X-rays Ex. P-19 and supported by the oral evidence of the claimant and the doctor, who were examined as PWs-1 and 2 respectively. He was treated as inpatient for a period of 8 days in Sarojini Hospital and underwent surgery and rod was implanted. Subsequently, he was admitted in Harsha Hospital for removal of implants. PW-2, the doctor has stated that the claimant has suffered disability of 40% to the limb and 15% to the whole body. He was working as driver and the Tribunal assessed his income at Rs. 4,000/-which is just and reasonable.
Considering the nature of injuries Rs. 35,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards ''pain and suffering'' is just and reasonable and it does not call for interference.
Rs. 83,657/- awarded by the Tribunal towards ''medical expenses'' is based on the medical bills produced by the claimant and there is no scope for enhancement.
Rs. 10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards ''convenience, nourishment and attendant charges'' is also just and proper and it does not call for enhancement.
Similarly, Rs. 12,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards ''loss of income during laid up period'' is marginally on the lower side. The nature of injuries sustained by the claimant suggests that he must have been out of employment for a period of 4 months and therefore it is just and proper to enhance it by another Rs. 4,000/- and therefore, I award Rs. 16,000/- under this head.
Rs. 15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards ''loss of amenities'' is just and proper and there is no scope for enhancement under this head.
The claimant is a driver by profession. PW-2, doctor has stated that the claimant has suffered 40% of disability to the limb and 15% to the whole body and there is restricted mobilization in the knee by flexion 40� and extension log of 5�. Internal derangement of 5� valgus strain is present and he has difficulty in walking over uneven surface and climbing stairs and he is advised to Hinged Knee Brace permanently while walking and the Tribunal is not justified in awarding Rs. 30,000/- towards disability instead of determining future loss of income. Considering the nature of injury and disability caused to the whole body is assessed at 10% and ''future loss of income'' works out Rs. 86,400/- (4000x12x18x10/100) and it is awarded as against Rs. 30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of disability.
The learned Counsel for the claimant submits that he has spent more than Rs. 5,000/-towards future medical expenses and therefore it is just and proper to enhance it by another Rs. 5,000/- and Rs. 10,000/- is awarded towards ''future medical expenses''.
The claimant is entitled for an additional/enhanced compensation of Rs. 65,400/- with interest of 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation
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 the name of the claimant 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.