The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to enhance compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act based on the evidence presented and the specific circumstances of the case.

JUDGMENT

H.T. Narendra Prasad, J. - This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for short) has been filed by the claimant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 08.12.2014 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal seeking enhancement of compensation.

2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 30.12.2009 the claimant was proceeding in Qualis Car bearing registration No.KA-05-C-3651 along with her friends. When the car reached near 2nd railway gate on NH-206 Road, Birur, Kadur Taluk, the car being ridden by its driver at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, while overtaking the Lorry bearing registration No.KA-09-9032 which was going ahead, dashed against the right hind portion of the Lorry. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the claimant and other inmates in the car sustained grievous injuries and were hospitalized.

3. The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act on the ground that she was working as an Advocate and was earning Rs.10,000/- p.m. It was pleaded that she also spent more than Rs.5,00,000/- towards medical expenses, conveyance, etc. It was further pleaded that the accident occurred purely on account of the rash and negligent riding of the car driver. On service of notice, the respondent No.2 filed written statement in which the averments made in the petition were denied. It was pleaded that the petition itself is false and frivolous in the eye of law. It was further pleaded that the accident was due to the negligence of the claimant herself and the accident took place solely due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle. The age and the medical expenses are denied. It was further pleaded that the quantum of compensation claimed by the claimant is exorbitant. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the petition. Notice to respondent No.1 is dispensed with.

4. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded the evidence. The claimant herself was examined as PW-1 and Dr.Nagaraj B.N. as PW-6 and other witnesses as PW-2 to PW-5 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P28. On behalf of the respondents, neither any witnesses were examined nor documents were got marked. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending Lorry bearing registration No.KA-09/9032 by its driver, as a result of which, the claimant and inmates in the car sustained injuries. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.10,99,000/- along with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.

5. Shri Gurudeva Prasad, learned counsel for the claimant contended that at the time of the accident claimant was aged about 27 years and she was working as an Advocate and was earning Rs.10,000/- per month and she has produced Ex.P21-Salary certificate issued by Shri M. Babu, Advocate, to show that he was paying salary of Rs.8,000/- per month to the claimant. The Tribunal is not justified in taking the notional income of the claimant as only Rs.6,000/- per month. Secondly, he contended that due to the accident, claimant had suffered permanent physical impairment and loss of physical function to whole body. She has examined Dr.Nagaraj B.N. as PW-6. In his testimony, he has deposed that the claimant has suffered disability of 45% in respect of whole body, permanent physical impairment and loss of physical function to whole body. Because of this disability, the claimant was unable to do her regular work. Tribunal has failed to consider the disability in respect of whole body. Thirdly, he has contended that due to the accident, claimant has suffered the following injuries;

"a. Severe tenderness over the post aspect of neck

b. Complete loss of sensation over both the lower limbs

c. Cervical spine injury to (C5 &