AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Patil, J.—This appeal by the claimant is directed against the common judgment and award dated 30th May 2008, passed in MVC No. 1113/2006, by the Principle Civil Judge (Sr. Dn), Member, Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Udupi, (for short, ''Tribunal'') for enhancement of compensation on the ground that, the compensation of Rs. 99,950/- with interest @ 8% p.a. awarded in favour of the claimant as against his claim for Rs. 10,00,000/-, is inadequate. The appellant claims to be aged about 30 years and working as Manager in Navneeth Bar and Family Restaurant, earning a sum of Rs. 20,000/- per month and was hale and healthy prior to the date of accident. That the occurrence of accident at about 12:30 P.M., on 23-05-2006, when the appellant and others were travelling in a Maxicab bearing Registration No. KA-20/7445, near Kamanur Gate of Mulabagalur Taluk of Kolar District, NH-4, on account of rash and negligent driving by the driver of the said Maxicab is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the appellant has sustained two grievous injuries and he was hospitalized for a period of five days and as per Ex. P36, he has sustained 25% disability. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident, he was shifted to the nearby Hospital.
It is his further case that, on account of the accident, he sustained injuries stated above 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.
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. 10,00,000/- against the respondents. The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal on 30th May, 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 sum of Rs. 99,950/- under different heads, with interest at 8% 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 the Insurer.
The submission of the learned counsel appearing for appellant, at the outset is that the Tribunal grossly erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards injury, pain and sufferings, conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges, loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness and loss of income during treatment period. To substantiate the said submission, he submitted that on account of the grievous injuries sustained in the road traffic accident, the appellant has taken treatment for a period of 20 days in the Hospital and the Doctor has assessed the functional disability at 25%, but the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards disability. The same cannot be sustained. Therefore, he submits that the impugned judgment and award passed by Tribunal is liable to be modified by awarding reasonable compensation under all the heads.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing for Insurer inter alia contended and substantiated the judgment and award passed by Tribunal stating that the same is passed after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and after consideration of the entire material available on file including the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for both parties and having regard to the age, avocation, nature of injuries sustained, disability etc and hence, the compensation awarded by Tribunal is just and reasonable. Hence, it does not call for interference.
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. 33,350/- towards medical expenses and Rs. 23,100/- towards loss of income during treatment period. 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. The Doctor has assessed the functional disability at 25% and the whole body disability would come to 8.33%. The appellant, being aged about only 30 years, has to endure this disability for the rest of his life. The compensation awarded by Tribunal towards loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness on account of disability is on the lower side and liable to be enhanced. Further, the monthly income of Rs. 7,700/- assessed by Tribunal on the basis of the salary Certificate produced by the appellant at Ex. P37 is also just and proper and I accept the same. 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 he should have taken bed rest and follow-up treatment at least for a period of three months. Therefore, the compensation awarded by Tribunal under the head, loss of income during treatment period is just and proper. Further, during the period of treatment, he would have spent reasonable sum towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges apartment from incidental and medical expenses. The compensation of Rs. 3,500/- awarded under the said head is on the lower side and liable to be enhanced. Therefore, having regard to the nature of injuries sustained, age, disability, avocation and the nature and duration of treatment, I award a sum of Rs. 50,000/- towards loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness on account of disability as against Rs. 10,000/-; Rs. 40,000/- towards pain and sufferings as against Rs. 30,000/-; and Rs. 10,000/- towards conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges as against Rs. 3,500/- awarded by Tribunal. Thus, the appellant in all, would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs. 1,56,450/-, with interest at 6% per annum on the enhanced sum, as against Rs. 99,950/- awarded by Tribunal, and the break up is as follows:
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 30th May 2008, passed in MVC No. 1113/2006, by the Principle Civil Judge (Sr. Dn), Member, Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Udupi, is hereby modified, awarding compensation of a sum of Rs. 1,56,450/-, with interest at 6% per annum on enhanced sum, as against Rs. 99,950/-, awarded by Tribunal. There would be an enhancement of compensation of Rs. 56,500/- with 6% interest per annum.
The second 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.
On such deposit by the Insurer, the entire sum shall be released in favour of the appellant, immediately.
Office to draw award, accordingly.