The court may enhance compensation awarded by a tribunal based on the claimant's actual expenses and injuries, reaffirming principles of just remuneration.

JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the claimant in O.P (MV) No.1626 of 2012 on the file of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Perumbavoor, seeking enhancement of compensation. The respondents herein were the respondents before the tribunal.

2. According to the claimant, on 15.08.2012 at about

3.00 p.m., while the claimant was riding his motorcycle, a tipper lorry bearing Reg.No.KL-41/5683 driven by the first respondent in a rash and negligent manner, hit the motorcycle and sustained serious injuries. The claimant approached the tribunal claiming a total compensation of ₹10,01,500/- which was limited to ₹7,00,000/-.

3. The first respondent/the owner-cum-driver of the offending vehicle, remained ex-parte before the tribunal. The second respondent/insurer of the offending vehicle filed a written statement admitting the insurance policy but disputing the quantum of compensation claimed. Before the tribunal, Exts.A1 to A11, Ext.B1 and Ext.C1 documents were marked. The tribunal, after analysing the pleadings and materials on record, awarded a sum of ₹3,60,044/- with interest @9% per annum as compensation under different heads against the respondent insurer. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal, the claimant has come up in appeal.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned standing counsel for the respondent insurer. 5. The learned counsel for the appellant claims enhancement mainly under the following heads:-

Bystander expenses :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that towards the head bystander expenses, the tribunal had taken only an amount of ₹250/- per day for 45 days thus awarding an amount of ₹11250/-. The learned counsel further submitted that the actual in-patient treatment was for 48 days, from 15.08.2012 to 17.09.2012, from 13.11.2012 to 21.11.2012, and from 28.11.2012 to 02.12.2012, totalling to 48 days. Considering the afore facts, I find it appropriate to award a consolidated amount of ₹15,000/- under the afore head. Thus, there will be an additional amount of ₹3,750/- under the head bystander expenses.

Expenses for transport :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that towards expenses for transport, though an amount of ₹10,000/- was claimed, the tribunal has granted only an amount of ₹2,500/-. The appellant was taken from Erumathala, Aluva to Medical Trust Hospital, Ernakulam, on six occasions and also for four reviews. Considering the afore facts, I find it appropriate to grant an additional compensation of ₹2,500/- totalling to ₹5,000/-.

Loss of earnings to the parents :- The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards loss of earnings to the parents during the period of hospitalization. On a perusal of the award, it is seen that the tribunal has adopted the principle laid down in Master Mallikarjun v. Divisional Manager, the National Insurance Co.Ltd and another [(2014) 14 SCC 396] . However, compensation was granted under the heads pain and suffering and loss of amenities. Since the compensation was awarded under the afore two heads, I find that the said compensation can be adjusted towards the loss of earnings to the parents.

Disfigurement :- On a perusal of the award, it is seen that the tribunal has awarded only an amount of ₹25,000/- as compensation for disfiguration. Considering the injuries sustained, I am inclined to grant an additional amount of ₹10,000/- totalling to an amount of ₹35,000/- under the afore head.

6. Though the appellant claimed enhancement of compensation under the other heads, on a perusal of the records available, I am not inclined to interfere with the compensation awarded by the tribunal under other heads since it appears to be just and reasonable. Since the appeal is of t