Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 859 (KAR)

M. S. Khaiser v. Divisional Manager, B. M. T. C.

2017-05-31

B.MANOHAR

body2017
JUDGMENT : 1. Appellant is the claimant. Being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in judgment and award dated 04.08.2011 made in MVC No.9941/2008 passed by the MACT, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’ for short), he filed this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation. 2. The appellant filed the claim petition, contending that on 15.11.2008 at about 10.00 a.m, while he was proceeding in a Kinetic Honda motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KA-02-V-1657, when he has stopped near Navarang Circle signal on M.K.K Road, a BMTC bus bearing Reg.No.KA-01-F-2083, driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner, dashed against the TVS motor cycle from right side, then TVS motor cycle dashed against the Kinetic Honda. Due to that, the claimant fell down and sustained grievous injury to all over the body. Immediately after the accident, he was shifted to the Varalakshmi Nursing Home, Bangalore, after first aid treatment, he took treatment at Chord Road Hospital, Bangalore. In the claim petition, he claims that at the time of accident, he was aged about 46 years and working as a Manager in A.S.A.P. Automation (India), Pvt. Ltd., and getting salary of Rs.24,700/- per month. He was out of job for a period of three months. In view of the injuries sustained, he cannot do the work which he was doing prior to the accident. Hence, sought for compensation of Rs.12,00,000/-. 3. Though notice was served on the first respondent, the BMTC remained unrepresented. The insurance company defended the case by filing written statement. 4. After trial, the Tribunal held that due to actionable negligence on the part of the driver of BMTC bus accident occurred and claimant has sustained injuries. Hence, he is entitled for the compensation. 5. With regard to the quantum of compensation is concerned, in the accident the claimant has sustained fracture of chip of right talus and 1st and 2nd degree burns over left leg, he has taken treatment as inpatient for a period of 20 days and he has undergone surgery for the chip replacement. He has furnished medical bills to an extent of Rs.1,44,000/-. Even after the accident, he was continued in the same job and there is no reduction in the salary. He has furnished medical bills to an extent of Rs.1,44,000/-. Even after the accident, he was continued in the same job and there is no reduction in the salary. The doctor who treated him has assessed the disability to an extent of 10% to the left leg, 5% to the right thigh and 5% to the left thigh, 20% to the whole body. The Tribunal taking into consideration all these factors awarded Rs.30,000/- towards pain and sufferings, Rs.41,056/- towards loss of income during laid up period, Rs.25,000/- towards loss of happiness and amenities of life and sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards medical and incidental expenses, in all sum of Rs.2,46,056/- with 6% interest per annum. The claimant being not satisfied with quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal filed this appeal. 6. The main contention of Sri. Shripad V Shastri, advocate appearing for opposite is that the quantum of compensation awarded towards pain and sufferings and loss of amenities of life is on lower side. No compensation has been awarded towards the expenses incurred towards hospitalization. Even though the claimant has continued in the same job and getting the salary, there is a reduction in performance of the work. No compensation has been awarded on the said head and also towards future medical expenses. Hence sought for enhancement of compensation. 7. On the other hand, Sri. A. Ravishankar, advocate appearing for the second respondent argued in support of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and also contended that the Tribunal after properly appreciating the oral and documentary evidence has awarded just and fair compensation and hence sought for dismissal of the appeal. 8. I have carefully gone through the argument addressed by the advocate appearing for the parties, perused the judgment and award and oral and documentary evidence. 9. The only issue that arise for consideration in this appeal is with regard to the quantum of compensation is concerned. 10. In the accident, the claimant has sustained fracture of chips of the right talus and 3rd degree burn injuries to the left leg. Initially he has taken treatment as inpatient for a period of five days, thereafter once again he got admitted and taken treatment as inpatient for a period of twenty days, a sum of Rs.30,000/- awarded towards pain and sufferings is lower side. Initially he has taken treatment as inpatient for a period of five days, thereafter once again he got admitted and taken treatment as inpatient for a period of twenty days, a sum of Rs.30,000/- awarded towards pain and sufferings is lower side. Even after, discharge from the hospital, he has taken follow up treatment for a period of 3 months. Hence, he is entitled to another sum of Rs.20,000/- towards the pain and sufferings in addition to Rs.30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Further the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards the incidental expenses when he was in the hospital as inpatient. Hence he is entitled for sum of Rs.10,000/- towards the incidental expenses. Further a sum of Rs.25,000/- awarded towards the loss of amenities of life is lower side. The claimant has to lead remaining life with that disability of 20% to the whole body. Hence, he is entitled for sum of Rs.25,000/- towards the loss of amenities of life in addition to Rs.25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Further the claimant is entitled for sum of Rs.15,000/- towards the future medical expenses. In all, the claimant is entitled enhancement of compensation of Rs.70,000/- in addition to Rs.2,46,056/- awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER Appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and award dated 04.08.2011 passed in MVC No.9941/2008 by the XII Addl. Judge-Member, MACT, Bangalore is modified. The claimant is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.70,000/- in addition to Rs.2,46,056/- awarded by the Tribunal with 6% interest per annum.