VINODH B.A. Vs. SITHER TSEWANG AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Claimant/injured, dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by judgment and award dated 20.02.2015 in MVC 1191/2013 of Addl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Mandya, (for short 'MACT'), has presented this appeal for higher compensation.

(2.) Appellant, aged 27, suffered L2 wedge compression fracture, bicolumnar + posterior wall fracture right acetabulum, pubic rami fracture, which were grievous, in the accident that occurred on 14.02.2013 involving the motor vehicle belonging to the first respondent and insured by 2nd respondent, following which appellant was brought to NIMHANS, Bengaluru from Mandya General Hospital and thereafter shifted to Hosmat Hospital, Bengaluru, on 15.02.2013 where he was an inpatient and discharged on 01.03.2013, whence, he underwent surgical intervention by way of recon plate fixation to posterior wall right acetabulum and D12 -L4 posterior stabilization. Appellant was once again admitted in Hosmat Hospital on 04.04.2013 and discharged on 10.04.2013 with advise to undergo regular physiotherapy.

(3.) In the claim petition registered as MVC 1191/2013 invoking Sec. 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, (for short 'Act') it was further asserted that on 16.02.2013 appellant underwent surgical intervention for stabilization of D12 to L4 with decompression of the cord and pedicle screws was done; on 18.02.2013, reconstruction plating of the right acetabulum was done and was intensively monitored in ICU with blood transfusions, despite which and follow -up treatment, weakness of lower limbs had been recovered and had incomplete control of bladder and bowel functions.