Anil Kumar vs Branch Manager, National Insurance ...

2. Few   relevant   facts   need   to   be   mentioned hereinbelow to appreciate the question involved in the appeal.

3. The appellant was working as a cleaner in a lorry bearing   Regn.   No.AP­21/V­4682   belonging   to respondent No.2 herein.   At the relevant time, it was insured   with   respondent   No.1.     On   05.12.2004,   at about   1.00   p.m.   near   VGM   Factory,   Belgal   Road, Bellary,   when   the  appellant  was standing  in  front   of the   abovementioned   lorry   for   the   purpose   of   loading iron   ore,   the   driver   of   the   lorry   moved   the   vehicle without   giving   any   signal   or   horn   and   dashed   it against   him.     As   a   result   of   which,   the   appellant sustained facture of both pelvic bones with rapture of urethra   and   abdomen   injuries   and   other   grievous injuries   all   over   his   body.     The   appellant   was   then taken   to   VIMS   Hospital,   Bellary   for   the   medical treatment.   The   appellant   claimed   to   have   spent   a substantial sum towards his medical treatment.   Due 2 to   the   aforementioned   injuries   sustained   by   the appellant, he has become permanently disabled to do the work which he was doing before the accident. At the time of accident, the appellant was 25 years of age and earning Rs.4000/­ per month.

4. The   appellant   filed   a   claim   petition   bearing M.V.C. No.711 of 2010 before the MACT­II at Bellary under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and claimed  compensation  from  the  respondents.   It was contested   by   the   respondents.     By   award   dated 12.04.2011, the Tribunal partly allowed the appellant’s claim petition.  It was held that the monthly income of the   appellant­claimant   was   Rs.4000/­,   that   the accident occurred due to sole negligence of the driver of   offending   vehicle,   that   the   appellant   sustained partial but permanent disability in the whole body to the   extent   of   25%   and   that   the   age  of   the   appellant was  25  years on the date of accident.   The Tribunal then   applied   the   multiplier   of   18   and   accordingly 3 awarded a sum of Rs.2,16,000/­ towards loss of future income,   Rs.75,000/­   towards   pain   and   sufferings, Rs.25,000/­   towards   medical   expenses,   Rs.15,000/­ towards   future   medical   expenses   and   Rs.12,000/­ towards loss of income during laid up period.   So far as the liability was concerned, the Tribunal held that the   policy   was   a   package   policy   equivalent   to comprehensive policy, which covers the risk of cleaner also.

8.  Aggrieved by the impugned order, the appellant­ claimant has filed this appeal by way of special leave in   this   Court.     So   far   as   the   Insurance   Company­ respondent   No.1   herein   is   concerned,   they   have   not filed any appeal against the impugned order.

5. The   Tribunal   accordingly   awarded   a   total compensation   of   Rs.3,43,000/­   with   interest   payable at the rate of 8% p.a. from the date of claim petition till payment against the respondents jointly and severally.

13. Learned   counsel   for   the   respondent   (Insurance Company)   urged   that   no   case   for   any   further enhancement   in   the   compensation   is   made   out   and that   the   High   Court   was,   therefore,   justified   in upholding the award of the Tribunal.

14. We   do   not   agree   with   the   submission   urged   by the   learned   counsel   for   respondent   No.1­Insurance Company for the abovementioned reasons given by us.

15. In  the   light   of the  foregoing  discussion  and the grounds mentioned above, which found acceptance to the Tribunal, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant is entitled for a further sum of Rs.5,00,000/­ in lump sum in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal, i.e., Rs.3,43,000/­. 7

16. In   other   words,   the   appellant   (claimant)   is   now entitled to claim a total sum of Rs.8,43,000/­ from the respondents   jointly   and   severally   by   way   of compensation   for   the   injuries   sustained,   partial   and permanent   disability   occurred,   medical   expenses incurred and loss occasioned due to injuries sustained by him in the accident.

17. We,   however,   do   not   award   interest   on   the enhanced   sum   of   Rs.5,00,000/­,   which   we   have awarded to the appellant. In this view of the matter, the appellant is entitled to claim interest only on the sum of Rs.3,43,000/­ at the rate of 8 % awarded by the Tribunal.

18. The   appeal   thus   succeeds   and   is   accordingly allowed.   Impugned   order   is   set   aside   and   the   award passed   by   the   Tribunal   is   modified   to   the   extent indicated above.

19. Respondent   No.1   (Insurance   Company)   is directed to deposit the awarded amount, as mentioned 8 above, within three months in the Tribunal to enable the claimant (appellant) to withdraw the awarded sum after making proper verification by the Tribunal.

August 31, 2018  9