IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MAY, 2017 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.MANOHAR MFA.NO.6972/2011(MV) BETWEEN:
KUM BHAGYALAKSHMI @ BHAVYA D/O ADIREDDY, AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS, R/AT BURUGAMADAGU VILLAGE, MITTEMARI HOBLI, BAGEPALLI TALUK. ... APPELLANT (BY SMT.SUGUNA R REDDY, ADV.) AND:
1. S.SHAFIULLA, S/O IMAM SAB, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT 1ST BLOCK, BAGEPALLI TOWN, CHICKBALLAPUR DISTRICT.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, “BINDU” NO.1092, NEAR DOOM LIGHT CIRCLE, NEW EXTENSION, KOLAR. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.G.BALAKRISHNA SHASTRY, ADV. FOR R1, SRI.C.M.POONACHA, ADV. FOR LEXPLEXUS, ADV FOR R.2) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 23/02/2011 PASSED IN MVC NO.46/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN.) & CJM AND MEMBER ADDL. MACT, CHICKBALLAPUR, CHICKBALLAPUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -
J U D G M E N T Appellant is the claimant. Being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in MVC No.46/2006 dated 23-02-2011 passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chickaballapur (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal" for short), the appellant filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
2. The appellant filed a claim petition contending that on 03-12-2001 at about 11.00 a.m., after finishing her college hours, she was returning to her village. When she reached the DVG road, the driver of the Tractor and Trailer bearing Registration No.KA-40/T-187 & 188 drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the claimant from hind side. Due to that she fell down and sustained grievous injuries all over the body. Immediately after the accident, she was shifted to Government Hospital at Bagepalli, after the first aid, she was shifted to Manjunatha Hospital, Chikkaballapura. She claims that she took treatment as inpatient for a period of one month and has spent more than Rs.75,000/- towards medical expenditure and she require another sum of Rs.15,000/- for removal of implants. In view of the injuries sustained, she has become permanently disabled to do any work. Hence, sought for compensation of Rs.6,00,000/-.
3. Respondents 1 and 2 in their written statement denied the averments made in the claim petition with regard to negligence. However, they have contended that due to negligence on the part of the claimant herself, the accident occurred and the claimant has sustained injuries. The 3rd respondent-insurance company in their written statement denied the averments made in the claim petition and also contended that due to negligence on the part of the claimant the accident occurred. Further, the compensation claimed is exorbitant and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.
4. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal framed necessary issues.
5. The claimant, in order to prove her case got herself examined as P.W.1 and got marked the documents as Ex.P1 to Ex.P10. On behalf of the respondents, none of the witnesses were examined nor has any documents been marked.
6. The Tribunal after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence let in by the parties, taking into consideration IMV report, copy of the complaint and charge sheet held that due to the actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the Tractor and Trailer the accident occurred and the claimant has sustained injuries. Hence she is entitled to compensation. With regard to quantum of compensation is concerned, in the accident she has sustained the following injuries:
(a) Degloving injury on right elbow and forearm;
(b) fracture of Ilium;
(c) abrasion over the face and left wrist; and (d) tenderness to the 6th and 7th ribs.
The doctor opined that abrasion over the face and left wrist is grievous in nature and other injuries are simple in nature. The Tribunal taking into consideration the injuries sustained and suffering undergone awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering; Rs.18,826/- towards medical expenditure; Rs.5,000/- towards attendant charges. In all, the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.33,826/- which was rounded off to Rs.34,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. The claimant, being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal has filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant contended that in the accident, the claimant has sustained fracture to her right hand, she has taken treatment as inpatient for a period of one month. In view of the injuries sustained, she has become permanently crippled lady and she cannot carry any weight in her right hand. The compensation awarded is too meager and sought for enhancement of compensation.
8. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for Respondents 1 and 2 i.e., owner and the insurance company of the vehicle argued in support of the judgment and award and contended that no document has been produced to show that she has undergone surgery to her right hand. The doctor who treated her has not been examined to assess the disability. In the absence of the same, the Tribunal taking into consideration the wound certificate Ex.P4 awarded just and fair compensation and sought for dismissal of the appeal.
9. I have carefully considered the arguments addressed by the learned counsel appearing for the parties. Perused the judgment and award, oral and documentary evidence adduced by the parties.
10. Occurrence of the accident and injuries sustained by the claimant is not in dispute. In the accident, the claimant has sustained degloving injury to the right elbow and forearm. Though the claimant claims that she has undergone surgery and internal fixation has been made, no document has been produced to substantiate the same. The doctor who treated the claimant was also not examined to assess the disability suffered by the claimant. Except producing the wound certificate, the medical certificate, copy of the order sheet in C.C.No.226/2002, medical bills and receipts, no documents have been produced to show that the she has spent more than Rs.75,000/- towards medical expenditure. She had furnished medical bills for a sum of Rs.18,826/-. Taking into consideration the injuries sustained and suffering undergone by the claimant, a sum of Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards pain and suffering is lower side. In addition to that, she has suffered fracture of Ilium. At least, minimum two months time is required for healing of the fractured Ilium. Hence, it would be appropriate, if another sum of Rs.20,000/- is awarded towards pain and suffering in addition to Rs.10,000/-. Further, Rs.5,000/- awarded towards diet, attendant charges is also lower side. Hence she is entitled to another sum of Rs.10,000/- under the said head. In all, the claimant is entitled enhanced compensation of Rs.30,000/- in addition to Rs.33,826/- awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER The appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and award dated 23-02-2011 made in MVC No.46/2006 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chickaballapur is modified.
The claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.30,000/- in addition to Rs.33,826/- awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.
Sd/- JUDGE mpk/-*