S. Sujatha, J.:— The Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation [the ‘Corporation’, for short] as well as the claimant are before this Court challenging the Judgment and Order passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore, [the ‘Tribunal’, for short] in MVC No. 2262/2010.
2. Briefly stated the facts are:
That the claimant instituted a claim petition before the Tribunal seeking compensation for the accidental injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident which occurred on 19.2.2010 while the claiming was travelling in KSRTC bus bearing No. KA 26.F 679 which collided with the lorry bearing registration No. MH 06.AC 5141. The Corporation and the third respondent contested the matter. The Tribunal, after appreciating the evidence on record, awarded total compensation of Rs. 4,08,850/- with interest at 6% per annum. Being aggrieved, the Corporation is before this Court contending that the Tribunal awarded exorbitant compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards injury, pain and suffering whereas the claimant is seeking for enhancement of compensation as the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate compared to the nature and gravity of injuries sustained by the claimant.
3. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
4. It is discerned from the records that the claimant has sustained grievous injuries. Exhibit.P5-Wound Certificate, Exhibits.P6 and P7 - discharge summaries issued by Chigateri Government Hospital, Davanagere and Bowring Hospital, Bengaluru would show that the claimant has suffered grievous injuries. The X-ray showed upper 1/3rd comminuted fracture of left tibia and fracture of upper 1/3 of fibula, i.e, fracture of both bones of left leg. Exhibits. P6 and P7 disclose that the claimant had suffered Type III B fracture, both bones of left leg for which he had taken treatment as an inpatient from 19.2.2010 to 16.9.2010 at Bowring Hospital, Bengaluru. The treated Doctor who is an Orthopedic surgeon of the Bowring Hospital was examined as PW.3 PW.3 has assessed the disability of the claimant at 37.5% to the whole body. It has come on record in the evidence of PW.3 that there is active pus discharging sinuses in the ventral aspect of left leg, indicating the presence of active infection and to avoid the same, amputation above the knee is the only ideal choice. Considering the evidence on record, the Tribunal assessed the disability at 25% to the whole body which deems fit to be sustained. It was contended that the claimant was working as a Painter and earning Rs. 9,000/- per month. Exhibit.P9 is the salary certificate though produced is not proved to be correct. In view of the same, the Tribunal determined the monthly income of the claimant at Rs. 4,500/-. It is obvious that this Court in such cases is normally determining the monthly income of the daily wage labourer at Rs. 5,500/- during the year 2010. In the absence of adequate material to substantiate the exact income, the monthly income of the claimant can be safely determined at Rs. 5,500/-. Applying the same with the multiplier of 14 with the disability of 25% as assessed by the Tribunal which is justifiable, loss of future income works out to Rs. 2,31,000/-.
5. It is an admitted fact that the claimant was treated as an inpatient for seven days at Bowring Hospital, Bengaluru. He has sustained two major fractures to both bones of the left leg and the evidence on record discloses that he was suffering from acute infection which would compel him to go for amputation above knee. In such circumstances, considering the age and the hospitalization period with the loss of income, the shock and trauma undergone by the claimant besides suffering pain and agony, the compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- awarded towards injuries, pain and suffering cannot be considered as excessive as contended by the Corporation. Given the circumstances, the said compensation of Rs. 1,00,000/- towards injury, pain and suffering is just and reasonable and does not call for any interference by this Court.
6. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards loss of amenities. It is manifest from the medical records that the claimant had sustained grievous injuries and its impact is there for the rest of his life. The claimant has to undergo lot of tribulations, inconveniences and discomforts for the rest of his life. The claimant is almost crippled for his life. In such an eventuality, it would be appropriate to award compensation of Rs. 25,000/- towards loss of amenities. Having re-determined the monthly income of the claimant at Rs. 5,500/-, considering the hospitalization period and the follow up rest which was necessarily required for the claimant, it would be appropriate to award compensation of Rs. 66,000/- towards loss of earnings during period of treatment.
7. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified as under:
Sl. No.ParticularsAmount [in Rs.]1Pain and sufferings1,00,0002Medical expenses7,3503Attendant charges21,0004Loss of earnings during the period of treatment66,0005Conveyance charges10,0006Loss of future earnings on account of disability2,31,0007Future medical expenses50,0008Loss of amenities25,000TOTAL5,10,350
8. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is modified to Rs. 5,10,350/- as against Rs. 4,08,850/-. The awarded amount shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of the petition till the realization. The liability shall be in terms of the order passed by the Tribunal. The Corporation shall satisfy the entire Award. The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the jurisdictional Tribunal for disbursement.
9. In the result, the appeal filed by the Corporation in MFA No. 713/2012 is dismissed and the appeal filed by the claimant in MFA No. 843/2012 is allowed to the extent indicated above.