Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 985 (KAR)

Pradeep M. v. Sundramurthy T. A.

2015-08-25

N.K.PATIL, P.S.DINESH KUMAR

body2015
JUDGMENT : N.K. Patil, J. 1. This appeal is by the appellant being aggrieved by the common judgment and award dated 6-9-2013 in MVC No. 8479 of 2009 passed by XVIII Additional Judge, Member, MACT-4, Court of Small Causes, Bangalore (SCCH-4) ('Tribunal' for short) in this appeal. By its judgment and award, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 3,78,000/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realisation as against the claim made by the appellant, on account of the grievous injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are: It is case of the appellant that, he was aged 26 years as on the date of accident, hale and healthy prior to the accident and was a Sales Executive earning Rs. 16,000/- per month. On 13-9-2009 at about 11.30 a.m. while the appellant was traveling in a Maruthi Omni bearing No. KA-02-MC-5005 from Banasawadi towards Thiruvalam at Krishnagiri-Vaniyambadi NH Road, near Natrampalli, Banglawpattu turning point, driver of the Tamil Nadu Government bus bearing No. TN-23-M-1987 came from Natrampalli towards Krishnagiri and turning towards Krishnagiri, at that time, the driver of the Maruti Omni drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the Tamil Nadu Government bus. Due to impact, the appellant sustained injuries and on account of which, he took treatment in the Hospital from 13-9-2009 to 25-9-2009. He underwent surgery of C4 and C5 and plates were inserted on 15-9-2009 and discharged from hospital on 25-9-2009 with advice of follow-up treatment. 3. The Doctor who has treated the claimant for fracture dislocation of C4 and C5 vertebra and anterior subluxation of C4 over C5 and has assessed the permanent partial impairment of cervical spine at 26% and 15% disability to the whole body. Further it is stated that, on account of accident, the appellant has suffered injuries die to which he has lost his future career. Further, it is the grievance of the appellant that, the Tribunal has erred in taking the income of the appellant at only Rs. 5,000/- p.m. though the appellant has produced salary certificate issued by Om Sri Electronics stating the appellant was getting a salary of Rs. 8,000/- plus incentives. The Tribunal has not awarded reasonable compensation towards pain and suffering, medical and incidental expenses, loss of amenities and discomfort and unhappiness. 5,000/- p.m. though the appellant has produced salary certificate issued by Om Sri Electronics stating the appellant was getting a salary of Rs. 8,000/- plus incentives. The Tribunal has not awarded reasonable compensation towards pain and suffering, medical and incidental expenses, loss of amenities and discomfort and unhappiness. Thus, he prays for enhancement of compensation. 4. The Tribunal, after hearing both sides and after appreciating the oral and documentary evidence, has allowed the said claim petition in part and awarded a sum Rs. (sic),000/- as compensation under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till its realisation. 5. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, so far as it relates to pain and suffering, loss of income during treatment period, conveyance nourishment food and attendant charges, loss of amenities, discomfort and unhappiness and loss of future income on account of disability in view of the injuries sustained in the road traffic accident, appellant has presented this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 6. The submission of Smt. Sunitha B.H. appearing for Sri Suresh M. Latur, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant at the outset is that, the Tribunal has erred in not awarding reasonable compensation towards pain and suffering, loss of income during the period of treatment, loss of future income medical expenses and conveyance, nourishing food and attendant charges. What is awarded is on the lower side. To substantiate her submission, she submitted that the appellant was working as a Sales Executive in Om Sri Electronics and getting salary of Rs. 8,000/- per month plus incentives. Therefore, she submitted that the appellant's income may be reassessed reasonably and award reasonable compensation. The Doctor who has treated the appellant has issued wound certificate as per Ex. P. 5 and has deposed that the appellant has suffered 26% permanent partial impairment of cervical spine on account of fracture of dislocation of C5 vertebra. This aspect has not been taken into consideration by the Tribunal. Therefore, she submits that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be modified, awarding just and reasonable compensation. 7. As against this, Sri H.S. Lingaraj, learned Counsel appearing for the second respondent, inter alia, contended and substantiated the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. Therefore, she submits that, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is liable to be modified, awarding just and reasonable compensation. 7. As against this, Sri H.S. Lingaraj, learned Counsel appearing for the second respondent, inter alia, contended and substantiated the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal. After due consideration of entire material available on record, the Tribunal has awarded reasonable compensation under different heads and it does not call for interference. 8. After carefully considering the submissions made by the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties and on perusal of the material available on record, including the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the only point that arises for consideration is: "Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?" 9. It is an undisputed fact that the appellant has sustained injuries in a road traffic accident that occurred on 13-9-2009 and the liability has been admitted by the insurer. The Tribunal after, appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence available on record taking into consideration the age, avocation, nature of injuries sustained and duration of treatment undergone, has awarded Rs. 30,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs. 20,000/- towards loss of amenities and happiness, Rs. 15,000/- towards loss of income during period of treatment, Rs. 1,60,000/- towards medical expenses and Rs. 1,53,000/- towards loss of future income due to disability, in all Rs. 3,78,000/-. 10. It is the case of the appellant, he was hale and healthy prior to the accident and was a Sales Executive earning Rs. 16,000/- per month. He gets pain while walking and is unable to climb stair case. The Doctor who has examined the appellant has stated in his evidence that, in view of disability it is difficult for the patient to do his Sales Executive Work or any other physical work and assessed permanent partial impairment of cervical spine at 26%. Due to the injuries suffered, he has to undergo follow-up treatment periodically. Hence, it requires reconsideration by enhancing reasonably. 11. Taking all these relevant aspects into consideration, we deem it fit to take income of the appellant at Rs. 6,500/- per month instead of Rs. 5,000/- p.m. taken by the Tribunal. Further, having regard to the nature of injuries suffered by the appellant and the agony he has to undergo in future, we deem it fit to award Rs. 11. Taking all these relevant aspects into consideration, we deem it fit to take income of the appellant at Rs. 6,500/- per month instead of Rs. 5,000/- p.m. taken by the Tribunal. Further, having regard to the nature of injuries suffered by the appellant and the agony he has to undergo in future, we deem it fit to award Rs. 50,000/- towards pain and sufferings as against Rs. 30,000/-, Rs. 1,75,000/- towards medical and incidental charges as against Rs. 1,60,000/-, Rs. 19,500/- towards loss of income during laid-up period at the rate of Rs. 6,500/- p.m. as against Rs. 15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal and Rs. 30,000/- is awarded towards loss of amenities as against Rs. 20,000/-. As regards, loss of future income, since we have assessed income of the appellant at Rs. 6,500/- per month, if it is calculated annually, it will come to Rs. 78,000/-. Having regard to the age of the appellant i.e. 26 years, 17' multiplier is applied and disability is taken at 15%. Thus, the loss of future income would be Rs. 1,98,900/- (Rs. 6,500/- x 12 x 17 x 15/100) as against Rs. 1,53,000/- awarded by Tribunal. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, the instant appeal is allowed in-part. The impugned judgment and award dated 6-9-2013 passed by the Tribunal in MVC No. 8479 of 2009 is hereby modified. The total compensation payable comes to Rs. 4,73,400/- as against Rs. 3,78,000/- and the break-up is as follows: 1. Towards pain and suffering Rs. 50,000/- 2. Towards medical and incidental expenses Rs. 1,75,000/- 3. Loss of income during treatment period Rs. 19,500/- 4. Loss of amenities Rs. 30,000/- 5. Towards loss of future income Rs. 1,98,900/- Total Rs. 4,73,400/- Enhanced compensation comes to Rs. 95,400/- with interest at 6% p.a. The 2nd respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 95,400/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment and award. Out of total enhanced compensation i.e. Rs. 95,400/-, Rs. 95,400/- with interest at 6% p.a. The 2nd respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs. 95,400/- with interest at 6% p.a., from the date of petition till the date of realization within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment and award. Out of total enhanced compensation i.e. Rs. 95,400/-, Rs. 50,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in the Fixed Deposit in any Nationalised or Scheduled Bank, in the name of the appellant for a period of five years and renewable for another five years, with liberty to him to withdraw the interest accrued on it periodically. The remaining Rs. 45,400/- with proportionate interest shall be released in favour of the appellant, immediately, on deposit by the Insurer. Draw up the award accordingly.