V. SATHYABHAMA, W/O R. VENKATESH Vs. K.P. SRINIVAS, S/O K.H. PUTTASWAMY GOWDA, NO. 779, 10TH D CROSS ROAD, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM, BANGALORE AND THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., D.O. XII, JAYALAKSHMI MANSION, 2ND FLOOR, 1001/56, DR. RAJKUMAR ROAD, 4TH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant who is the claimant in MVC No. 3329/2005 on the file of Court of Small Causes/Addl. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Bangalore City, is before this Court, praying for enhancement of compensation. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the claimant is a graduate and teaching Handicrafts and earning Rs.8,000/ - per month but the Tribunal has fixed the income of the claimant at Rs.3000/ - per month. She also submits that the claimant sustained fracture of left clavicle, fracture of both bones of pubic rami, fracture of left temporal parietal bone associated with haematoma in the scalp. But the Tribunal has awarded a meagre compensation of Rs. 1,54,400/ -. She prays for enhancement of compensation towards relevant heads of compensation.

(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the respondent no.2 Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal has awarded adequate compensation and there is no good ground for enhancement of compensation.

(3.) IN Ex. P.7 wound certificate issued by Pristine Hospital dated 17.3.2005, it is stated that the claimant sustained multiple small abrasions on the left face and abrasions on both hands, dorsal aspect of both hands, dorsal aspect of left elbow, right knee and fracture of left clavicle at the junction of cordial 2/3 iaterally and fracture of left tempore parietal bone associated with haematoma in the scalp. The Medical Officer has noticed left eye was black and bleeding through both nostrils and injury' nos.7 and 8 are grievous in nature. But in the discharge summary issued by the said Hospital (vide Ex.P. 12), it is stated that pelvis with both hip, fracture superior ramus of right public bone. There is x -ray of pubic rami. There appears to be an omission to mention about the pubic rami in the wound certificate. The claimant has not proved her income that she was earning Rs.8000/ - per month. She has not even produced any record to show that she was a graduate. However, taking into consideration that the claimant was aged about 41 years, even if she is treated as a housewife, as resident of Bangalore, her income can be safely fixed at Rs.4,500/ - per month. There is one medical bill dated 9.3.2005 for Rs.5000/ -said to be paid towards medicines A lumpsum amount is mentioned but details of the medicine is not mentioned. The Tribunal has not made any observation in that regard. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.40,000/ - towards medical expenses. We see no good ground to award any more amount towards medical expenses. Taking into consideration the nature of injuries sustained, it would meet the ends of justice to award a reasonable compensation towards pain and suffering. The Tribunal has fixed the income of the claimant at Rs.3000/ - per month, permanent disablement at 10% of the whole body, applied multiplier 14 and awarded compensation as under: - <FRM>JUDGEMENT_2429_TLKAR0_2012(1).html</FRM> Taking into consideration the claimant has sustained fracture of pubic rami, clavicle and left temporo parietal bone, she required atleast five months time to take treatment and rest. The Tribunal has rightly fixed the permanent disability at 10% of the whole body. In our view, the claimant is entitled for compensation as under: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_2429_TLKAR0_2012(2).html</FRM> Thus, the appellant/claimant is entitled for additional compensation of Rs.73,700/.