3. It is the case of the claimant / appellant herein that the award passed by the Tribunal below is inadequate, when the claimant has suffered fractures on both the left and right sides femurs in the thigh, left patellar and right side zygoma and when the Doctor has assessed the disability at 55%, the award of Rs.80,000/- towards disablement is highly inadequate.
4. The main contention raised by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant is that when the employment of the claimant is stated to be a Cleaner, which involves extensive physical work, the Tribunal, without appreciating the loss of earning capacity, has omitted to award adequate compensation, by adopting multiplier method of quantification to assess the loss of earning capacity or by awarding disablement compensation. It is also pointed out that the loss of enjoyment of amenities has not been considered by the Tribunal.
5. In order to appreciate the contentions raised, it is necessary to re-look into the details of the award passed.
6. The claimant has very clearly stated in his evidence that the injuries sustained by him are grievous in nature and that immediately after the accident he has taken treatment at Krishnagiri Government Hospital and later shifted to St. John Hospital, where he took treatment as inpatient from 14.08.2008 to 27.08.2008. After the first surgery over left femur, there was a second surgery in the left cheek. The wound certificate dated 13.07.2010 describes the following injuries:-
(i) Fracture right side femur.
(ii) Fracture left side femur.
(iii) Left patellar fracture.
(iv) Fracture Right side Zygoma.
7. The Doctor has stated that because of several fractures suffered by the claimant, there is restriction in the movement and therefore there will be difficulty in standing, walking, carrying heavy objects and also in squatting. Disfigurement has also stated to be one of the consequence. Considering all the cumulative facts and circumstances, the Doctor has certified the disablement at 55%. It is also to be pointed out that, when there had been fracture on both sides thigh bones, there will be difficulty in moving during physical work and consequently, there would be loss of earning capacity.
8. As rightly contended by the learned counsel appearing for the claimant / appellant herein, at least, disablement compensation should have been considered at the rate of Rs.3,000/- per percentage. If that is taken into account, the disablement compensation would be Rs.1,20,000/-. The pain and sufferings should have been awarded at Rs.30,000/-. Thus, the award of pain and sufferings is enhanced from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.30,000/- and the disablement compensation is enhanced from Rs.80,000/- to Rs.1,20,000/-. The amount of compensation awarded under other heads are reasonable and hence, the same are confirmed as such. Thus, there will be an overall enhancement of Rs.50,000/- towards the entire amount of compensation.
9. In the result, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed, by enhancing the quantum of compensation from Rs.1,96,000/- to Rs.2,46,000/-, which is payable with interest at 7.5% per annum, from the date of petition till the date of deposit. No costs.
10. The Insurance Company / second respondent shall deposit the entire amount of compensation, less the amount already deposited, if any, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The claimant / appellant herein is not entitled to any interest for the default period. On such deposit being made, the Tribunal is directed to transfer the said sum to the Savings Bank Account to the claimant / appellant, through RTGS. The claimant shall pay the necessary court fee for the enhanced compensation before receiving the copy of this judgment.
07.09.2017 Index : Yes / No Web : Yes / No srk Dr. S.VIMALA, J., srk To
1. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal cum Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Dharmapuri.
2. The Section Officer, V.R.Section, Madras High Court, Chennai 104 C.M.A.No.1825 of 2017 07.09.2017