IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B. SREENIVASE GOWDA M.F.A.NO.317/2010(MVC) BETWEEN R.GOVINDA NAIK, S/O RAMAN NAIK, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, NO.20, CHOKKANA HALLI LAYOUT, HEGDE NAGAR MAIN ROAD, BANGALORE-64.
... APPELLANT (By Sri : V VENKATARAMA REDDY, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.25, SHANKAR NARAYAN BUILDING, M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-1.
(POLICY NO.070500/31/07/01/ 00005971 FROM 20.07.07 - 19.7.08 2.M/S PRERANA MOTORS PVT. LTD., ALLA BAKASH, S/O AHMMED, TANK BUND ROAD, CHINTAMANI( T ), KOLAR(D), KOLAR. (OWNER OF THE GOODS TEMPO BEARING NO.KA-07/6105) ...RESPONDENTS (By Sri : L SREEKANTA RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R1 NOTICE TO R-2 DISPENSED WITH) MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 15.04.2008 PASSED IN MVC NO.6290/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE 14TH ADDITIONAL JUDGE, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES- 10, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
J U D G M E N T The claimant-appellant aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal has preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
2. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for parties, the appeal is heard, admitted and disposed of finally.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal.
4. As there is no dispute regarding certain injuries sustained by the claimant in a road traffic accident occurred on 24.8.2007 due to rash and negligent driving of a Tempo bearing registration No.KA- 07-6105 by its driver and liability of the insurer of the offending vehicle, the only point that arises for my consideration in the appeal is:
“Whether compensation of Rs.1,86,000/- with interest @ 6.% p.a. awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?”
5. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for parties and perusing the judgment and award of the Tribunal, I am of the view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable, it is on the lower side and hence it is required to be enhanced.
6. As per the discharge summary Ex.P-6 and wound certificate Ex.P7, the claimant has sustained following injuries:-
a) Fracture of shaft right femur b) Fracture of right clavicle c) Fracture of right radius wrist d) Abrasion over left eye The injuries sustained and treatment underwent by the claimant are also evident from Medical bills Ex.P- 8, prescriptions – Ex.P-9, lab reports Ex.P-12, inpatient records Ex.P-15, out patient records Ex.P-15, old X-rays Ex.P-16 and recent X-rays Ex.P-17 and supported by the oral evidence of the claimant and doctor, who were examined as PWs-1 and 2 respectively. PW-2, Dr.P.N.Prakash in his evidence has stated that the claimant has suffered disability to the extent of 30% to right femur, 15% to right clavicle, 10% to right radius and 18% to the whole body. He has further stated that the claimant has to undergo one more surgery for removal of implants.
7. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, a sum of Rs.85,000/- is awarded towards ‘pain and suffering’ as against Rs.75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
8. As Rs.43,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards ‘medical expenses’ is based on the medical bills produced by the claimant, it is just and proper and there is no scope for enhancement under this head.
9. The claimant was treated as inpatient in Bhagavan Mahaveer Jain Hospital, Bangalore. Considering the same, Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards ‘incidental expenses’ such as conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges as against Rs.6,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
10. The claimant claims to have been working as a Mechanic in a Gas Company and earning a sum of Rs.4,500/- per month and has produced salary certificate issued by his employer at Ex.P13, according to which his salary was Rs.4,545/-. The nature of injuries suggest that he must have been under rest and treatment for a period of 6 months and therefore a sum of Rs.27,270/- is awarded towards ‘loss of income during laid up period’ as against Rs.16,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
11. PW.2 – Doctor has stated that claimant has suffered disability of 30% to right femur, 15% to right clavicle and 10% to right radius. So the disability caused to the whole body comes to 18%. It is not the case of the claimant that after sustaining aforesaid injuries, he has discontinued his employment as a Mechanic in a Gas company. Nevertheless, the nature of injuries sustained by him would show that he may have to undergo certain amount of discomfort and unhappiness in his future life. Considering the same, justice would be met if a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- is awarded towards ‘permanent disability’.
12. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, disability stated by the doctor and an amount of discomfort and unhappiness he has to undergo in his future life, a sum of Rs.50,000/- is awarded towards ‘loss of amenities’ as against Rs.40,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
13. The nature of injuries suggest that claimant is required to undergo further treatment and has to spend some amount towards future medical and incidental expenses and therefore, a sum of Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards ‘future medical and incidental expenses.
14. Thus, the claimant is entitled for the following compensation:-
HEADS Rs.
Pain and sufferings 85,000=00 Medical Expenses 43,000=00 Incidental expenses 10,000=00 Loss of income during laid up period 27,270=00 Loss of amenities 50,000=00 Permanent disability 1,00,000=00 Future medical expenses 10,000=00 TOTAL 3,25,270=00 LESS: Compensation awarded by the Tribunal 1,86,000=00 BALANCE 1,39,270=00 15. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed-in-part.
The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated herein above. The claimant is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.1,39,270/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of realisation.
16. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the additional compensation amount together with interest within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment excluding the interest for the period of 491 days. From which, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with proportionate interest is ordered to be invested in fixed deposit in the name of claimant in any Nationalised Bank/Scheduled Bank/Grameena Bank/Post Office for a period of 3 years and with a right of option to withdraw interest periodically. Remaining amount with proportionate interest is ordered to be released into the SB account of the claimant by RTGS.
17. The Tribunal while releasing the remaining amount is also directed to issue the fixed deposit slip, so as to enable the claimant to withdraw the deposit amount on its maturity without approaching the Tribunal once again and the Bank is directed to release the fixed deposit amount without insisting for any further order from the Tribunal.
18. Release of amount and fixed deposit slip shall be done on the same day.
No order as to costs.
SD/- JUDGE DKB