The court affirmed the nexus between the accident and death, enhancing compensation to Rs.14,71,904 due to confirmed injuries leading to bronchitis.

JUDGMENT :

LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J.

1. Aggrieved by the award passed in MVC.No.663/2010 dated 23.08.2023 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Tiptur, whereby the Tribunal had awarded the compensation of an amount of Rs.12,78,800/-, the claimants as well as the Insurance Company are before this Court. The claimants’ appeal is MFA.No.8555/2024 and the Insurance Company’s appeal is MFA.No.7582/2023.

2. It is the case of the claimants that on 25.02.2010, the deceased engaged offending vehicle for hire to shift tamarind bags, at about 7.00 am., the driver of the offending vehicle drove it in a rash and negligent manner with high speed without following traffic rules and capsized the said vehicle on the left side on the NH-206 road and caused the accident. Due to said accident, the deceased sustained head injuries and injuries all over the body. Immediately, the injured was shifted to Government Hospital at Tiptur for treatment, the doctor had given first aid treatment to the injured. On the advice of the duty doctor, the injured was shifted to NIMHANS Hospital at Bengaluru for further treatment and afterwards, the injured was shifted to Manipal Hospital and admitted as inpatient. The doctors gave treatment to the injured and then discharged him with an advice to take regular treatment. The injured was shifted to Balaji Nursing Home at Tiptur and he was taking regular treatment as inpatient and he died while taking the treatment on 02.03.2010 at about 5.30 am. In the earlier round of litigation, this Court had remanded the matter giving liberty to the claimants to adduce the evidence with regard to the nexus between the accident and the death. After the remand, the present order is passed. On behalf of the claimants Ex.P4 is marked i.e., the true copy of the PM report. Then Ex.P7 are the prescriptions and all the medical records pertaining to the Manipal Hospital. The Manipal Hospital records reveals the injuries, the fractures, the neurological complaints, the diagnosis, the discharge summary and it also mentions that the family wants to get the patient discharged from the hospital and they want to shift the deceased to another hospital. When it comes to the evidence, the doctor, who was examined as CW1, who has done the post mortem had stated that the third injury shown in Ex.P4 was caused due to the bronchitis and broncho pneumonia disease. It is stated that as per Ex.P4, the third injury is multiple abrasion over the shoulder 3X4 centimeters. The Tribunal had observed that Ex.P4-P.M. report coupled with the oral evidence of CW1 shows that the disease bronchitis and broncho pneumonia caused due to the injuries sustained by the deceased in the accident. If the accident had not caused, the deceased would not have suffered from the said disease. Moreover, Ex.P4-P.M. report shows that the deceased sustained injuries on the vital parts of the body in the accident. This fact clearly discloses that the main reason for the death of the deceased is accident, otherwise, normally a 35 years old youth would not have suffered from such a disease. The oral evidence of CW1 and other documentary evidence produced by the claimants shows that the deceased died due to the injuries sustained in the accident. Basing on the evidence, the Tribunal had awarded the compensation as per the table given below:

3. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submits that the injuries sustained by the deceased, the discharge summary, the MLC, nothing has been placed on record. It is submitted that there is no nexus between the death and the accidental injuries and the claimants have failed to prove the nexus and without any basis, the Tribunal had held that because of the acciden