Judgment on the adequacy of compensation in personal injury claims considering contributory negligence and permanent disability.

JUDGMENT

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge), Hosur in M.C.O.P.No.273 of 2020 dated

10.11.2022.

2.It is the case of the claimant that he filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in a road accident that occurred on 19.05.2020. According to the claimant, on the date of occurrence, while he was riding his two-wheeler on the Hosur–Denkanikottai Road, an APE vehicle bearing Registration No.KA-51-AD-4946 came from the opposite direction and was driven in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the claimant’s vehicle, resulting in the accident. In the said accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries, particularly, open fracture of right femur, and immediately he was taken to Government Hospital, Hosur and thereafter, admitted in Kauvery Hospital, Hosur, where he underwent surgical treatment.

3.The Tribunal, after considering the oral and documentary evidence, held that the accident occurred due to the negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle, but fixed 20% contributory negligence on the claimant and awarded a total compensation of Rs.3,46,726/- with interest. Dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant has preferred the present appeal seeking enhancement.

4.The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the Tribunal has awarded very meagre compensation under several heads, particularly towards permanent disability, pain and sufferings and other conventional heads. The Tribunal failed to appreciate the fact that after the accident, the appellant has been subjected to surgery in order to fix a plate in his leg and once again, one more surgery had been performed to remove the plate from his leg. It is further submitted that the Medical Board assessed the permanent disability of the claimant at 40%, however the Tribunal adopted a very low rate for calculating disability compensation. The learned counsel therefore contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable and hence, the same requires enhancement.

5.On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the 2^nd respondent / Insurance Company would submit that there was no negligence on the part of the driver of the impugned vehicle and the alleged accident was held due to the contributory negligence of the claimant, who was riding the motor bike in a rash and negligent manner. Further, the claimant, who is the rider of the motor cycle was not wearing helmet and suddenly moved right track and in the process, hitting on LMV of the 1^st respondent. Further, the claim of the compensation is excessive and seeks for dismissal of the claim petition.

6.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the material on record.

7.On a perusal of the medical records, it reveals that the claimant sustained fracture of right femur and underwent surgical fixation. The Disability Certificate issued by the Medical Board assessed the permanent disability at 40%. Considering the nature of injuries, the treatment undergone and the resulting disability, this Court is of the view that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under certain heads requires modification. In cases of fracture injuries resulting in permanent disability, this Court generally adopts a reasonable rate per percentage of disability. Taking into consideration the year of accident, the nature of injuries and the disability suffered, this Court fixes Rs.8,000/- per percentage of disability. Therefore, a sum of Rs.3,20,000/- [40 ×

Rs.8,000/- = Rs.3,20,000/-] is awarded towards perman