The court ruled that compensation must be re-assessed based on accurate income and disability evaluations, enhancing the award to reflect just compensation for road traffic accident injuries.

JUDGMENT :

Ashok S. Kinagi, J.

These Appeals are filed under Section 173(1) of the MOTOR VEHICLES ACT , 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘M.V.Act,’ for short), challenging the judgment and award dated 13.09.2021 passed in MVC No.65/2020 by the learned Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Shiggaon.

2. Brief facts, leading rise to the filing of these appeals, are as follows:

3. On 21.05.2018, the petitioner, while returning from Hubballi to Haveri in NWKRTC bus bearing Reg.No.KA- 27/F-535, a lorry bearing Reg.No.MH-09/CA-1836, driven by its driver, came in a rash and negligent manner, and dashed to the bus. As a result, the petitioner has sustained fractures and the grievous injuries. He incurred a huge medical expenses. Hence, the petitioner filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the M.V.Act claiming compensation for the injuries sustained by him in a road traffic accident. Accordingly, prays to allow the claim petition.

4. The owner of the offending vehicle, though appeared through the counsel, however did not file any statement of objections.

5. The Insurance Company filed a statement of objections denying the averments made in the claim petition. It is contended that the accident occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus. It is contended that the liability of the insurance company is subject to the policy terms and conditions. Hence, prays to dismiss the claim petition against the Insurance Company.

6. The Tribunal, based on the pleadings of the parties, framed the relevant issues.

7. The petitioner, to substantiate his case, examined himself as P.W.1, examined two witnesses as P.Ws.2 and 3, and marked 154 documents as Exs.P1 to P154. Conversely, the Officer of the Insurance Company was examined as R.W.1, and marked 4 documents as Exs.R1 to R4.

8. The Tribunal, after assessing the verbal and documentary evidence, allowed the claim petition in part vide judgment dated 13.09.2021, and awarded a compensation of Rs.22,30,700/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till the date of realisation, and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount.

9. The Insurance Company and the petitioner, both being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed in MVC No.65/2020 insofar as the quantum of compensation, have filed these Miscellaneous First Appeals.

10. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the Insurance Company and the learned counsel for the petitioner.

11. Learned counsel for the Insurance Company submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the higher side. He submits that the Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the petitioner at Rs.19,500/-, which is on the higher side. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal filed by the Insurance Company, and dismiss the appeal filed by the petitioner.

12. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was doing mobile business, and because of the injuries sustained in a road traffic accident, he has stopped the business. He submits that the petitioner has produced the income tax returns marked as Exs.P-145 and P-146, which disclose that the petitioner was having a monthly income of Rs.19,500/-. He also submits that the Tribunal has not added future prospects. He also submits that to prove the disability, the petitioner has examined the doctor as P.W.3, who has deposed that petitioner has suffered a permanent disability to an extent of 88% to the left lower limb, wherein the Tribunal has taken the disability at 30%, which is on the lower side. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal filed by the petitioner, and dismiss the appeal filed by the Insura