The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of compensation for road traffic accidents under Sec. 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, considering loss of future income, loss of amenities, and pain and sufferings.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. This appeal under Sec. 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has been filed by the claimant being aggrieved by the judgment dtd. 12/10/2018 passed by the MACT, Hassan in MVC No.2036/2017.

2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 10/9/2017 at about 06.00 p.m., the claimant along with her friends was traveling in the KSRTC Bus bearing Registration No.KA-13-F1884. When it reached near Hattavara Gate, the driver of the said Bus drove the same in a rash and negligent manner with high speed. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the claimant fell down and sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized.

3. The claimant filed a petition under Sec. 166 of the Act seeking compensation. It was pleaded that she spent huge amount towards medical expenses, conveyance, etc. It was further pleaded that the accident occurred purely on account of the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

4. On service of notice, the respondent has appeared through counsel and 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. The age, avocation and income of the claimant and the medical expenses are denied. It was further pleaded that the quantum of compensation claimed by the claimant is exorbitant. Hence, sought for dismissal of the petition.

5. 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.Abdul Basheer was examined as PW-2 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P23. On behalf of the respondents, one witness was examined as RW-1 but no documents were 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 vehicle by its driver, as a result of which, the claimant sustained injuries. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.92, 711.00 along with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. and directed the Corporation to deposit the compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed.

6. The learned counsel for the claimant has raised the following contentions: Firstly, at the time of the accident, the claimant was aged about 19 years. She was studying in Diploma and she was also assisting her parents in agricultural activities and earning Rs.15, 000.00 per month, but the Tribunal has not granted any compensation for 'loss of future income'. Secondly, the claimant has examined the doctor as PW-2. The doctor in his evidence has stated that the claimant has suffered disability of 20% to spine. Due to the disability, she was unable to do her day to day work. But the Tribunal has failed to grant any compensation towards 'loss of future income'. Thirdly, due to the accident, the claimant has sustained grievous injuries. She was treated as inpatient for a period of 3 days. Even after discharge from the hospital, she was not in a position to discharge her regular work. She has suffered lot of pain during treatment. Considering the same, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the heads of 'loss of amenities', 'pain and sufferings' and other incidental expenses are on the lower side. Hence, she sought for allowing the appeal.

7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Corporation has raised following counter contentions:

Firstly, even though the claimant claims that she was earning Rs.15, 000.00 per month, she has not produced any documents to establish her income. Since she was a Diploma student, there is no loss of income. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly not granted any compensation under the head of 'loss of future income'.

Secondly, the injuries suffered by the claimant are minor in nature. She was inpatient in the hospital