The claimant in MCOP.No.142 of 2004, being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation paid by the Tribunal for the injuries he suffered in a road accident has come forward with this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
2. On 13-01-2004 at about 9.15 p.m., the claimant/appellant was riding his cycle on his way home, when a tipper lorry bearing No.TN28-X-6945 belonging to the first respondent and insured with the second respondent knocked him down leaving him suffering major head injuries. Seeking a compensation of Rs.4,00,000/-, but limiting it to Rs.3,00,000/-, the claimant approached the Tribunal. The Tribunal has passed an award for Rs.90,000/- payable with interest at 9% per annum.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant has suffered grievous head injury and multiple depressed fracture of the skull. He was hospitalised for 11 days, and in the process of surgical correction of his injuries during hospitalisation, the broken or crushed bones of the skull had to be permanently removed. The doctor, who examined the claimant has testified before the Tribunal that the head injury he suffered has left the victim with loss of memory, fits and shivering of left hand, besides affecting vision of his left eye. On a medical assessment of his disability, the doctor fixed it at 40%. The claimant was then working as an Assistant in a private company and was earning Rs.4,500/- per month and he was 32 years at that relevant time. The Tribunal has however, fixed the disability of the appellant at 45% and granted compensation of Rs.45,000/- on this head. Towards loss of income during the period of treatment, it has granted Rs.20,000/-. Including the damages awarded on other heads of compensation, it arrived at Rs.90,000/- as compensation payable.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that it is a case where the Tribunal has overlooked the fact that small portion of the appellant's skull bone was removed and he is perennially exposed to any danger. This in essence has restricted his prospects of engaging in an avocation of his choice and enhancing the quality of his life. He added that there is hardly any rebuttal evidence to negate the effect of the medical evidence tendered by P.W.4 and that even though the appellant's disability was medically determined at 40% , in real functional terms, the injury should be treated as functional disability at a much higher rate.
5. Per contra, the learned counsel for the second respondent/insurance company argued that the Tribunal has reckoned the income of the appellant at Rs.4,500/- ,when there was hardly any evidence to indicate that. Further, he argued that there is no medical evidence to the effect that the injuries suffered by the victim has actually imperilled his career and future career prospects. Therefore, contended the counsel that the Tribunal was reasonable in awarding compensation.
6. After hearing rival submissions and upon perusing the records of this case, this Court finds, first, that the Tribunal has not relied on the stated income of Rs.4,500/- anywhere in its award. Secondly, it has not adequately appreciated how the injuries suffered by the appellant might have impacted his life and not just his career. It is difficult to presume that someone with loss of memory, shivering of hands and unprotected head would be easily employed. I therefore consider the appellant has truly suffered functional disability.
7. Since the appellant has not produced any document to indicate his income, I reckon taking it at 2004 standards of living rate at Rs.3,000/- a month. This Court also reckons the functional disability suffered by the appellant at 60%. Accordingly, the loss of compensation payable on the head of functional disability is [Rs.3,000x12x16x60%] Rs.3,45,600/-. For pain and suffering, it is enhanced to Rs.50,000/-. On other heads of compensation, the amount awarded by the Tribunal is confirmed. The break-up details of the enhanced award of compensation is as below : Heads of Compensation Amount Enhanced (Rs.) Towards functional disability 3,45,600.00 Pain and suffering 50,000.00 Transportation 5,075.00 Scan charges 925.00 Extra nourishment 5,000.00 Medical Expenses 4,000.00 Loss of earning for six months 18,000.00 Total 4,28,600.00 In all the compensation is enhanced from Rs.90,000/- to Rs.4,28,600/-
6. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the second respondent is directed to deposit Rs.4,28,600/- with interest at 9% p.a., less if any already deposited, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, whereupon the claimant is permitted to withdraw the same forthwith. The appellant is directed to pay the additional court fee for the enhanced portion of the award amount. It is also made clear that the claimant/appellant is not entitled to the award of interest during the period of delay in filing the appeal. No costs.
02.08.2017 ds Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No To:
1.The Sub Judge, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Tiruvallur.
2.The Section Officer VR Section High Court Madras, Chennai.
N.SESHASAYEE,J ds C.M.A.No.1871 of 2011 02.08.2017