The main legal point established in the judgment is the entitlement to fair and adequate compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses suffered in a motor accident, as provided under the Motor Vehicles Act.

JUDGMENT

This appeal by the claimant for enhancement of compensation is directed against the award dated 22-06-2006 passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, South Tripura, Udaipur in T.S. (MAC) 47 of 2004 whereby he awarded compensation of Rs. 64,800/- in favour of the claimant under the following heads:-

Since the only issue involved in this case is as to what amount of compensation the claimant is entitled to, it is not necessary to discuss the other evidence.

2. The undisputed facts are that the claimant met with an accident on 31-07-2003 and was taken to the Tripurasundari Hospital at Udaipur. He was referred to the G.B. Hospital, Agartala and remained admitted there from 01-08-2003 to 19-09-2003. The discharge certificate also shows that he was diagnosed with fracture of the left femur and fracture on the Colles's (right side). After discharge on 19-09-2003, he was advised to keep his leg in traction and asked to report to OPD after six weeks. Other than this, there is no other medical record. The claimant was a carpenter and he claimed that his income was Rs. 4,000/- per month, but the learned Tribunal assessed his income at Rs. 1,500/- per month.

3. After going through the award, I am constrained to observe that the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal did not comprehend the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act nor did he assess the compensation according to well established principles laid down from time to time.

4. It is settled law that when a person sustains injuries in an accident, that person is entitled to compensation for damages/loss suffered. These losses can be categorized in two categories, i.e. pecuniary losses and non-pecuniary losses. Under the head of pecuniary losses are the medical expenses, transportation expenses, attendant charges and all other charges relating to treatment; under the head of pecuniary losses are also the losses of income, if any suffered, and the future loss of income which the claimant may suffer. Where evidence is led to show that medical treatment may be required in future, the Court would also be entitled to pass an award for future medical expenses.

Under the non-pecuniary head of damages, the claimant must be awarded compensation for pain and suffering and if there is a permanent disability. The claimant also has to be compensated for loss of amenities of life and future discomfort, if any. In case, the claimant suffers severe disability or disfiguration and the claimant is an unmarried person, then such person can also be awarded damages for loss of marital prospects.

5. Now, I proceed to assess the damages under each head separately. Admittedly, the claimant remained in hospital from 31-07-2003 to 19-09-2003, i.e. for 51 days. The claimant has only been awarded a sum of Rs. 3,256/- for medical expenses. These are only the cash memos of the medicines purchased by the claimant who is an uneducated carpenter. A person belonging to this strata of society does not know that a claim petition can be filed and that he will have to retain each and every receipt with regard to purchase of medicines. At the time when a person like this is seriously injured, the relatives are more worried about getting the injured treated than about retaining the vouchers. Keeping in view the extent of treatment, i.e. 51 days and the fact that the claimant suffered from two fractures and had also received a head injury, I am of the opinion that he is entitled to at least Rs. 10,000/- for medical expenses, special diet etc. This will also include the cost of his transportation from Udaipur to Agartala and back.

6. The learned Tribunal has not awarded any amount whatsoever to the claimant for attendant charges though the claimant had claimed that his family members came and resided at a hotel in Agartala. Even the gratuitous service rendered by the family members or friends of an injured person has to be compensated for by the tortfeasor. In the present case, the accident took