RAJSHEKAR UDUPA Vs. RAJESH SHETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH this matter is posted today for orders, with the consent of learned counsel appearing for both the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal. This appeal by the claimant/appellant for enhancement of compensation is directed against the impugned common judgment and award dated 13/12/2012 passed in MVC No.708/2010, by the District Judge and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Udupi, (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal' for short), on the ground that, a sum of Rs. 13,38,400/ - awarded by the Tribunal under different heads with interest at 6% p.a., on Rs. 13,08,400/ - from the date of petition till the date of deposit, as against the claim of Rs. 46,01,175/ -, on account of the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident is inadequate.

(2.) IN brief, the facts of the case are: The appellant claims to be aged about 42 years at the time of the accident. He was hale and healthy prior to the accident and doing Paurohitya and also running Medical shop and earning Rs. 20,000/ - per month from Paurohitya and Rs. 6,000/ - per month from Medical shop . That on 4.3.2010 at about 1.40 p.m. appellant was proceeding on his Motor bike bearing Reg.No.KA.20.Q.3286 along with his daughter as a pillion rider from Kundapura side towards Udupi on NH 17 and when they came in front of Shrinivasa Kalyana Mantap, Sasthana, at that time, the driver of the car bearing Reg.No.KA.20.N.6565 came from the same direction in a zig zag manner and left front rear portion of the said car dashed to the motor bike. Due to which, the pillion rider was thrown out from the bike, fell on its left side and the appellant fell on right side of motor bike and the left side both wheels of the car ran over on the left lower limb of the appellant and sustained grievous injuries. Immediately, they were shifted to Mahesh Hospital, Brahmavar and then shifted to KMC Hospital, Manipal, where he took treatment as inpatient for one and half months, undergone surgery, amputation was done on left lower limb below knee, implants were inserted and thereafter, on the advise of the Doctor, he has taken bed rest and follow up treatment.

(3.) IT is the further case of the appellant that, he spent considerable amount towards medical expenses, conveyance and other incidental charges. On account of the injuries sustained by the appellant in the said accident, he has suffered permanent disability. The Doctor has assessed the physical disability at 62% to left lower limb. Therefore, appellant has filed a claim petition before the Tribunal under Section 166 of M.V. Act, claiming compensation against the respondents.