N PAVITHRA Vs. H M VIJAYAKUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE claimant-injured dissatisfied with the award of Rs. 30,000/-as global compensation for personal injuries by common Judgment and award dt. 29. 12. 2005 in MVC 732/04, on the file of the Civil judge (Sr. Dn) and JMFC -cum- Member, MACT-VI, Hospet, for short the 'mact', has presented this appeal for enhancement of compensation.

(2.) BEFORE the MACT, the appellant laid evidence both oral and documentary and examined one Dr. Vishwaprasad, Surgeon, as pw-3, who testified to the fact that the appellant suffered three simple and one grievous injury, viz. , disc prolapse and hip disc between C-3 and C-4 vertebra, diagnosed as compression fracture of clavicle spine and discprolapse of C-3 and C-4, which even after treatment was found to be malunited. The opinion of PW-3 was that the appellant suffered 15-20% total partial permanent disability. The MACT disbelieved the medical bills issued at Hospet, since prescriptions were issued by the Medical Officer, M. M. Halli. The MACT, on the basis of the medical evidence, held that the petitioner has sustained simple fracture and awarded compensation as follows: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_4770_ILR(KAR)_2007Html1.htm</FRM>

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant assailing the findings of the MACT contends that the award of global compensation of rs. 30,000/- is meagre having regard to the fact that the appellant sustained a grievous injury to the vertebral column, C-3 and C-4, which due to mal-union resulted in 15-20% permanent partial disability to the whole body. According to the learned counsel the award of rs. 15,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs. 5,000/- each towards medical expenses, loss of income during treatment and rest and attendant charges are conservative. In addition it is contended that the lower side. While the MACT was not justified in declining to award compensation towards loss of marriage prospectus; loss of amenities in life and loss of future income due to disability.