V. Nagaraj vs Gangappa Karani

N.K. Patil, J.—This is a claimant''s appeal for enhancement of compensation against the impugned judgment and award dated 14/10/2011 passed in MVC No. 937/2010, by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and VI Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Davangere, (hereinafter referred to as ''Tribunal'' for short), on the ground that, a sum of Rs. 2,00,485/- awarded with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, as against the claim of Rs. 20,00,000/-, on account of the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident is inadequate.

In brief, the facts of the case are:

The appellant claims to be aged about 25 years at the time of the accident. He was hale and healthy prior to the accident and working as Sales Executive in Maruthi Motors and was getting the salary of Rs. 7,000/- per month and was getting the incentive of Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 30,000/- per month. That on 12.7.2010 at about 1.30 p.m. appellant was going on his motorbike bearing No. KA.17.X.9402 from DCM Railway gate towards Davanagere City and when he came in front of DCM School, on P.B. Road, at that time, the driver of the Ape Piaggio bearing Reg. No. KA.17.B.1358 came in a rash and negligent manner without following traffic rules and dashed against him. Due to which, he fell down and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, he was shifted to C.G. Hospital and then Apoorva Hospital, Davanagere, where he took treatment as inpatient for 21 days and thereafter, on the advise of the Doctor, he has taken bed rest and follow up treatment.

It is the further case of the appellant that, he spent considerable amount towards medical and other incidental charges. On account of the injuries sustained by the appellant in the said accident, he has suffered permanent disability. The Doctor has assessed the physical disability at 35%. Therefore, appellant has filed a claim petition before the Tribunal u/s 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the respondents.

The said claim petition had come up for consideration before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after hearing both sides and after assessing the oral and documentary evidence, has allowed the said claim petition in part and awarded a sum Rs. 2,00,485/- as compensation under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization.

Being dis-satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant has presented this appeal, seeking enhancement of compensation.

We have heard the learned counsel appearing for appellant and learned counsel appearing for Insurer.

The submission of the learned counsel appearing for appellant, at the outset is that, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards injury, pain and sufferings, towards loss of amenities and towards future medical expenses and what is awarded is inadequate and it is liable to be enhanced reasonably. To substantiate the said submission, he has taken us through the evidence of Doctor PW3 and the evidence of PWs 1 and 2 and submitted that, PW3, after clinical examination of the appellant has opined that, appellant suffers permanent disability at 35% and he cannot sit cross legged and he is unable to run and walk long time. He further submits that on account of the injuries sustained by the appellant, he has taken treatment as inpatient for 21 days and during the said period, he might have suffered mental shock and agony. Further he submits that on account of the permanent disability suffered by him, he being the Sales Executive by profession is not in a position to do his work effectively as he was doing earlier. But these aspects of the matter have not been considered or appreciated by the Tribunal while awarding compensation. Further, he submitted that the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at 6% p.a., is on the lower side and is liable to be enhanced since the accident is of the year 2010. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned judgment and award is liable to be modified.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for insurer, inter-alia, substantiated that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and after due appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on file and therefore, it does not call for interference. However, after going through the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant which is grievous in nature, he submitted that the compensation awarded towards injury pain and sufferings, loss of amenities discomforts and unhappiness may be considered and reasonable compensation may be awarded in accordance with law.

After careful consideration of the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for both the parties and after perusal of the original records available on file, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for our consideration is:

Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?

The occurrence of the accident and the resultant injuries sustained by the appellant as per Ex. P9-wound certificate are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that, appellant was aged about 25 years, working as Sales Executive and hale and healthy prior to the accident. On account of fracture of right tibial condoyle he has suffered permanent disability at 35% and due to which, he is not in a position to do his work as he was doing earlier being a Sales Executive by profession. Discomforts and unhappiness persists through out his life and it would affect his happiness in future life and also affects his earning capacity.

Further, it emerges that, on account of the injuries sustained by the appellant, he has taken treatment as inpatient for 21 days and during the course of treatment, he might have undergone pain and agony, he might have sustained financial loss, as he could not have attended his work regularly and the disability is permanent in nature and it would affect his happiness. Taking into consideration the nature of injuries sustained by the appellant, the nature and duration of treatment and the percentage of disability suffered by him, we deem it fit to award another sum of Rs. 50,000/- with interest at 8% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization since the accident is of the year 2010 in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 14/10/2011 passed in MVC No. 937/2010, by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and VI Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Davangere, stands modified, awarding the compensation of Rs. 50,000/- with interest at 8%. p.a., from the date of petition till its realization in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

The Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 50,000/- with interest at 8% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and award.

Immediately on such deposit by the Insurer, the entire enhanced compensation with interest shall be release din favour of the appellant

Draw the award, accordingly.

Learned counsel Sri. B. Pradeep is permitted to file vakalath for 3rd respondent Insurer within four weeks from today.