JUDGMENT :

H.B. PRABHAKARA SASTRY, J.

1. This appeal is filed under Section 173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) Challakere, (hereinafter for brevity referred to as ‘The Tribunal’ for short), by judgment and award dated 08.06.2010, passed in MVC No. 136/2007.

2. The summary of the case of the claimant in the Tribunal is that on 6.5.2006, while he was travelling as a passenger in a bus bearing registration No. KA-16-B-7999 from Kasavarahatti to Pillalapalli village and while the bus was going near Duggavara on Obalapura Road, due to the rash and negligent driving of the said bus by its driver, who lost the control of his driving, it rammed to a road side tree resulting in road traffic accident. Due to the said accident, he sustained simple and grievous injuries on various parts of his body, including the fractures. He was treated as inpatient in Bapuji Hospital, Davanagere, for more than ten days and has spent a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs for medical expenses. Stating that at the time of accident, he was an agriculturist earning Rs. 6,000/- per month and due to the injuries sustained by him, he has been totally disabled to do any avocation and earn his livelihood, the appellant has prayed for a total compensation of a sum of Rs. 4 lakhs payable by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 respectively in their capacity as owner and insurer of the alleged offending vehicle respectively.

3. Before the Tribunal, the claimant got himself examined as PW-1 and got marked documents from Exs.P-1 to P-33. On behalf of the respondent-Insurance Company, one Sri V. Somashekar, its officer, was examined as RW-1 and documents at Exs.R-1 and R-2 were marked.

4. After analysing the evidence and the materials placed before it, though has held that the claimant was entitled for medical expenses of a sum of Rs. 8,000/- against the medical bills he has produced for a sum of Rs. 12,586/- and also that he was entitled for compensation towards mental shock and agony, pain, nutritious food and special diet, attendant charges and conveyance, loss of income during the period of treatment, loss of amenities and enjoyment of life, instead of assessing the compensation applicable under different heads, it has awarded a global compensation of a sum of Rs. 22,000/- with interest at 6% thereupon. However, it fixed the liability only upon the owner of the offending vehicle exonerating its insurer from its liability on the ground that respondent No. 1/owner has allowed his bus as contract carriage for a marriage ceremony without a valid and appropriate contract carriage permit and route. It is against the said judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, the claimant has filed this appeal.

5. The appellant/claimant in his memorandum of appeal has taken a contention that the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal under various heads are all meager. Further stating that the Tribunal ought to have awarded the compensation as claimed by him, has prayed for allowing the appeal.

6. The present appeal being the claimant’s appeal and the respondents having not preferred either cross-objection or a counter appeal, the question of occurrence of accident on the date, time and place as alleged by the claimant and also the alleged rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle is not in dispute. The only question that is required to be considered is about the reasonableness of the quantum of compensation awarded and the liability of the insurer to pay the compensation amount and to recover it subsequently from the owner of the offending vehicle.

7. Heard the arguments from both sides and perused the materials placed before this court.

8. The learned counsel for the appellant/claimant in his argument submitted that the medical documents, more particularly, the wound certificate and the medical certificate at Exs.P-5, P-7 and P-8, clearly go to show that the claimant had sustained