In personal injury claims, assessment must consider future earning capacity and include provisions for future medical expenses, significantly impacting compensation awarded.

JUDGMENT :

Ravi V Hosmani, J.

With consent of both parties, matter is taken up for final disposal.

2. Challenging judgment and award dated 21.04.2022 passed by I Addl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Kalaburagi (for short ‘tribunal’) in MVC no.217/2020, this appeal is filed.

3. Sri Sanjay Patil, learned counsel submitted that appeal was by claimant for enhancement of compensation. It was submitted at 8:30 p.m. on 10.12.2019, when claimant was riding pillion on motorcycle bearing no. MH-12/JJ-0549 on Katraj-Kondhawa road, Pune, driver of Lorry no. KA-28/C-9911 drove it in rash and negligent manner and dashed against motorcycle causing accident. In said accident, claimant sustained grievous injuries. Despite taking treatment at Bharati Hospital and Research Centre, Dhanakawadi, Pune and Kamareddy Hopsital, Kalaburagi he did not recover fully and sustained permanent physical disability and consequent loss of earning capacity. Claimant filed petition under Section 166 of MV Act against owner and insurer of lorry.

4. Despite service, owner did not appear and was placed ex-parte. Insurer appeared and filed objections, denying age, occupation and loss of earning capacity as well as alleged violation of terms and conditions of policy by insured. Insurer also opposed claim petition on ground of being excessive.

5. Based on pleadings, tribunal framed issues and recorded evidence. Claimant examined himself and Dr.SB Kamareddy as PWs-1 and 2 and got marked Exs.P-1 to 13. Respondent did not lead any oral evidence, but, got marked insurance policy as Ex.R-1 with consent.

6. On consideration, tribunal held accident had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of driver of lorry, claimant sustained permanent physical disability and was entitled for compensation from insurer as follows:

7. Dissatisfied with same, claimant was in appeal.

8. It was submitted, claimant had sustained fracture on right tibia and amputation of right leg above knee, despite same, tribunal awarded meager sum of Rs.60,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities and requested for enhancement. It was submitted, claimant was stated to be working as a plumber and earning Rs.18,000/- p.m. However, tribunal assessed monthly income at Rs.13,250/- p.m. It was further submitted that tribunal had taken permanent physical disability at 78% as per assessment of PW-2, but did not add future prospects as per decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Mohd. Sabeer @ Shabir Hussain v. Regional Manager, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation , (2022) 18 S.C.R. 427 . It was further submitted, award of Rs.12,000/- towards attendant, food and conveyance charges was also on lower side, considering that claimant had undergone inpatient treatment for a period of 30 days. Likewise, even award of Rs.26,500/- towards loss of income during lay off period is also on lower side. On above grounds, sought for enhancement.

9. On other hand, Sri Sanjay M Joshi, learned counsel for respondent opposed appeal. It was submitted, tribunal had awarded just compensation under separate heads, which do not call for interference.

10. Heard counsel and perused judgment and award.

11. From above, since, claimant is in appeal only questioning quantum, only po