S. ARPITHA Vs. SUJATHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal has filed this appeal, seeking enhancement. It is on 19.02.2007, the appellant was standing on the left side of the road and at that time a car bearing reg. No. KA 05 -MK 2079 came from Tumkur side and hit the appellant, as a result she sustained severe injuries and lost 4 upper teeth. She took treatment in different hospitals and said to have incurred medical expenses. It is under these circumstances she claimed compensation and the Tribunal after recording the evidence and on appreciation of the material on record, has granted compensation of Rs. 1,00,000 -00 on different heads. The appellant dissatisfied with the amount of compensation has filed this appeal, seeking enhancement.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties. The actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the car is not in dispute. As could be seen from the injuries suffered, the appellant sustained lacerated wound on her lower limb and 4 upper teeth were broken. The Tribunal taking into consideration the nature of the injuries suffered, has granted compensation of Rs. 25,000 -00 towards pain and sufferings and mental agony, Rs. 15,000 -00 towards medical expenses, Rs. 5,000 -00 towards attendant charges, special diet etc., Rs. 20,000 -00 towards loss of amenities of life and Rs. 35,000 -00 for fixing 4 teeth, thus a total sum of Rs. 1,00,000 -00 was granted as compensation. So, as could be seen from the different grounds on which the compensation has been awarded, it appears that the Tribunal has lost sight off the fact that the appellant being a girl aged about 11 years at the time of the accident and there is diminution in the marriage prospects. In the circumstances, I think that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 10,000 -00 for loss of marriage prospects. So far as the medical expenses for fixing the teeth is concerned, though the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 35,000 -00, I think an additional sum of Rs. 5,000 -00 would meet the ends of justice. The compensation awarded on different other heads are just and reasonable. Hence the appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs. 15,000 -00 with interest at 6% p. a. from the date of the petition till its payment. In that view of the matter, the appeal is allowed in part. In addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs. 15,000 -00 with interest at 6% p. a. from the date of the petition till its payment. The guardian of the appellant is permitted to withdraw the amount enhanced for incurring the medical expenses.