HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N. TUKARAMJI
M.A.C.M.A.No.942 of 2011
JUDGMENT:
Dissatisfied by the quantum of awarded compensation, the claimant / petitioner filed this Appeal against the decree and judgment dt.06.01.2011 in MVOP.No.775 of 2006 on the file of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (III Additional District Judge) (F.T.C.), Nizamabad.
2. The claim petition was filed under Section 166(1)(a) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1994 claiming compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- with interest at 24% per annum on account of the injuries sustained by him in a motor accident on 17.04.2006.
3. The brief facts of the case are that on 17.04.2006 when the appellant / claimant was proceeding on his motor-cycle bearing Registration No.AP-25-B-9472 (the motor-cycle), and while approaching Nallur Village on NH-7, an APSRTC Bus bearing No.AP-11-Z-3240 of the Warangal Depot (the bus) was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner at high speed and as the driver lost control over the bus, it went on the wrong side of the road and dashed the motor-cycle as a result the appellant / claimant slumped and the bus ran over him causing severe and multiple fracture injuries all over his body. Immediately, the appellant / claimant was shifted to Shashank NTR,J ::2:: macma_942_2011 Hospital, Nizamabad where he underwent treatment as in-patient from 17.04.2006 to 27.04.2006 and later continued as out-patient and incurred expenditure of Rs.2 lakhs. However, he is suffering permanent disability. Thus, filed the petition for compensation.
4. The Tribunal, after considering the material on record, awarded Rs.77,069/- with 6% interest per annum from the date of petition till date of realization, and held both the respondents liable to pay compensation.
5. Aggrieved by the amount awarded, the present Appeal is filed contending that the Tribunal failed to grant compensation towards, (i) Loss of Earnings; (ii) Future Medical Expenses, (iii) Future Medical expenditure; (iv) Attendant Charges and (v) Medical Expenses, and that the amounts under these heads shall be enhanced.
6. The insurer / respondent pleaded that the Tribunal had rightly appraised the claim and properly awarded the compensation amounts and in this Appeal no valid ground is made out to consider otherwise.
7. In these contesting pleas, the point arises for determination is "whether the compensation awarded to the appellant / petitioner is just and proper?".
8. The Tribunal awarded Rs.30,000/- towards two fracture injuries and Rs.5,000/- towards 'Pain and Suffering'; Rs.35,069/- towards Medical Expenditure; Rs.5,000/- for 'extra nourishment'; and Rs.2,000/- towards 'transportation charges', totaling to Rs.77,069/-.
NTR,J
::3:: macma_942_2011
9. To note, neither special nor general damages prescribe damages for the injuries. But the damages are awarded for pain and suffering and trauma as a consequence of the injuries. In the present case, compensation is granted for the injuries and pain and suffering separately. Howsoever, even if the amounts granted under these two heads, viz., Rs.35,000/-, the compensation under this head is found minimal, in the nature of injuries and treatment undergone by the appellant / petitioner. Thus, Rs.50,000/- is granted towards 'Pain and Sufferings'.
10. The appellant / claimant filed Medical Bills / Ex.A.5 only for Rs.35,069/-. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence of treating Doctor / PW.2 rightly granted the total amounts reflected in the bills. However, this amount is rounded off to Rs.35,100/-. Further, the appellant / claimant claimed future medical expenses, yet no material is placed to substantiate this averment. Hence, no amount can be granted on this account.
11. Further, the Doctor / PW.2 in his evidence did not refer to any physical disability of the appellant / claimant. Except the self-serving oral plea, no evidence is on record. Further, at least, there is no explanation what is the physical disability and how it is affecting the activities of avocation and earning capacity. Therefore, no amount can be granted for 'loss of earnings' due to disability. Thus, the conclusion of the Tribunal on this aspect is justified.
NTR,J
::4:: macma_942_2011
12. The Tribunal, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, awarded Rs.2,000/- towards Transportation Charges, and this amount is found on the lower side. Therefore, considering the statement that the appellant / claimant undergone treatment as in-patient and out- patient, Rs.5,000/- is granted towards transportation charges.
13. That apart, during the period of treatment, the necessity of attendants can be believed. Though a person is not specifically appointed, the family members of the appellant / petitioner would have been extended their support by making out some time from their avocations. In this view, Rs.5,000/- is awarded for 'attendant charges'.
14. Further, the amount of Rs.5,000/- granted towards 'extra nourishment' is maintained.
15. Accordingly, the compensation amounts awarded by the Tribunal is modified in the following terms, viz., (1) Pain and Sufferings : Rs.50,000.00 (2) Medical expenditure : Rs.35,100.00 (2) Transportation Charges : Rs.5,000.00 (3) Attendant Charges : Rs.5,000.00 (4) Extra nourishment : Rs.5,000.00 ================= TOTAL : Rs.1,00,100.00 =================
16. In the result, the appeal is allowed in part as follows :
NTR,J ::5:: macma_942_2011
(i) the appellant / claimant is awarded compensation of Rs.1,00,100/- with interest at 7.5% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization;
(ii) the 1st and 2nd respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation and directed to deposit the awarded compensation within one month;
(iii) after the deposit, the appellant / claimant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount; and
(iv) rest of the appellant / claimant's claim is dismissed.
17. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any in this Appeal, shall stand closed.
______________________ N. TUKARAMJI, J Date: 25.11.2021 Ndr