Sri Vinayak M K Vs the Managing Director

THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.03.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.8261/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE 10TH ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH16), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:14159 MFA No. 4585 of 2018

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A. PATIL

¶22

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶23

This appeal is filed by the injured/claimant seeking for higher compensation challenging the judgment and award dated 19.03.2018 passed in MVC.No.8261/2016 by the Court of Small Causes and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Bengaluru (SCCH-16) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal' for short).

¶24

Though, this appeal is listed for orders, with the

¶25

consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

¶26

Sri Suresh M.Latur, learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has committed a grave error in not awarding any compensation under the

¶27

head loss of income due to permanent disability by ignoring the oral evidence of P.W.3, who has categorically

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:14159 MFA No. 4585 of 2018

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

made a statement before the Tribunal that there is 18% disability to the appellant. It is submitted that the Tribunal has further committed an error in ignoring the fact that the appellant sustained fracture to weight bearing bone and the award of compensation by the Tribunal on all other heads is required to be reassessed appropriately by appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on record. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal by enhancing the compensation.

¶31

Per contra, Sri D.Vijaykumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Corporation supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and submits that the Tribunal has clearly recorded the finding that the appellant sustained injuries like tenderness with swelling, deformity over the right forearm and deep abrasion over the right palm and cut lacerated wound over the first web space and considering such injuries, the Tribunal has disbelieved the oral evidence of P.W.3 by well reasoned judgment. It is

¶32

4 - NC: 2026:KHC:14159 MFA No. 4585 of 2018

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

submitted that the award of compensation by the Tribunal

¶35

on all other heads is also just and proper and does not call for any enhancement. Hence, he seeks to dismiss the appeal.

¶36

I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for respondentCorporation and meticulously perused the material

¶37

available on record.

¶38

The only point that would arise for

¶39

consideration in this appeal is:

¶40

" Whether the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal calls for any interference?"

¶41

The above point is answered in affirmative for the following reasons:

¶42

The material on record indicates that on 18.07.2016, the appellant met with a road accident and he was provided treatment at Chinmaya Mission Hospital. The perusal of Ex.P.7-wound certificate and Ex.P.8-discharge

¶43

5 - NC: 2026:KHC:14159 MFA No. 4585 of 2018

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

summary indicate that the appellant sustained injuries like tenderness with swelling, deformity over the right forearm and deep abrasion over the right palm and cut lacerated wound over the first web space. The claimant examined P.W.3 - Dr.P.K.Raju an orthopedic surgeon from Victoria Hospital. His evidence indicates that the appellant suffered permanent disability to the extent of 18% to a particular limb and to the whole body at 6%. Based on the said disability, the Tribunal awarded total compensation Rs.1,37,664/- with interest at the rate of 9% p.a.

¶46

It is to be noticed that the Tribunal has come to a conclusion that the appellant/claimant has failed to produce the salary certificate to prove his income and he has also failed to produce the termination letter to indicate that due to disablement the appellant lost the job and reduced his earning capacity. Hence, I do not find any error in the finding recorded by the Tribunal in rejecting the claim for award of compensation under the head of loss of income due to disability.

¶47

6 - NC: 2026:KHC:14159 MFA No. 4585 of 2018

¶48

HC-KAR

¶49

It is to be noticed that the Tribunal

¶50

considering the nature of employment, age of the injured and the treatment provided to him, awarded compensation on all other heads. In my considered view, taking note of

¶51

the oral and documentary evidence on record, it would be appropriate to enhance compensation on all other heads appropriately.

¶52

Having reassessed the evidence and taking note of the treatment provided to the

¶53

injured/claimant in Chinmaya Mission Hospital and also keeping in mind the appellant has undergone surgery, the compensation is reassessed as under:

¶54

Sl.No.	Description	Amount
1	Pain and suffering	Rs.50,000/-
2	Medical expenses	Rs.34,664/-
3	Attendant charges, food, extra nourishment, conveyance charges etc.,	Rs.15,000/-
4	Loss of income during laid up period Rs.9,500/-x3 months	Rs.28,500/-

¶55

7 -

¶56

NC: 2026:KHC:14159 MFA No. 4585 of 2018

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

5	Towards disablement	Rs.20,000/-
6	Loss of amenities	Rs.45,000/-
	Total	Rs.1,93,164/-

¶59

In the result, the Court proceeds to pass the

¶60

following:

¶61

ORDER

¶62

(i) Appeal is allowed in part .

¶63

(ii) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the claimant would be entitled to a total compensation of Rs.1,93,164/- as against Rs.1,37,664/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶64

(iii) The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit.

¶65

(iv) The respondent-Corporation is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of 6(six) weeks

¶66