M VENKATESWDRLU Vs. M BALARAMAIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant/claimant lost his right leg below knee level due to the injuries suffered by him in a motor vehicle accident at Hyderabad on 31-10-1987. The accident was said to be caused due to the negligence of the driver of the lorry bearing No.AAT 5576 belonging to respondent No.1 and insured with respondent No.2. Therefore, he laid claim before the Motor Vehicle Accidents Claims Tribunal, Guntur in O.P. No.440 of 1987 under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. That claim having been resisted by respondent No.2, the insurer and having enquired into the claim, the Tribunal held that the accident was due to the negligence of the driver of the vehicle and that the respondents were liable to pay compensation and that Rs.30,000/- should be the just sum of compensation. On behalf of the appellant it is contended that the amount so awarded is inadequate and requires to be enhanced. There is no representation for the respondent.

(2.) Both from the testimony of the claimant as P.W.I and from that of the doctor P.W.3, it was established that due to the accident the claimant sustained crush injury to his right leg and also a contusion 2" x 2" overlying lacerated wound of 11/2" x 1/4" bone deep present on the left side of the upper part of the occipital region and his right leg was amputated below knee level and he suffered permanent disability upto 50%.

(3.) The Tribunal did not consider the items of compensation to arrive at Rs.30,000/-. The income of the deceased was found to be Rs. 100/- per mensem as a labourer as per the hospital records. The age of the claimant was found to be 45 years. The claimant having suffered a crush injury to the right leg and the injury on the occipital region of the head, must have suffered shock and pain at the time of accident and pain and agony at the time of medical treatment and particularly, when his leg was amputated which put him to the mental agony also to know that he was no longer a fully physical man having lost one leg, a permanently disabled man. The fantom limb is one of such experience of persons losing a limb. He must have lost his basic pleasures and amenities like movement, posture and many known and knowable comforts with the use of such leg. For such first item of compensation, in a case like this, Rs.15,000/- deserves to be awarded. For the amputation of the right leg below knee level, the comparable costs have been awarded as general damages ranging from Rs.20,000 to Rs.50,000/- and even more. In Iqbal Singh vs. Sohan Singh, for the amputation of the right leg from thigh level, Rs.30,000/- were awarded towards general damages. For the amputation of the right leg above knee level, Rs.50,000/- were awarded in New India Assurance Company Limited vs. Charan Kaur. In a similar case, a global compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- were given in Bhagwandas vs. Md. Arif. In Ram Singh vs. State of Punjab Rs.60,000/- were awarded in a similar case. In a case where bones of both the legs were fractured leading to amputation of one of the legs, Rs.1,00,000/-, global compensation was given by the Supreme Court in Pushpa Thakur vs. Union of India. Therefore, the general damages in this case for the amputation of the right leg below knee level ought to be Rs.35,000/-. For the injury on the head with so much of size and the psychological consequences, Rs.5,000/- should be awarded. For medical and incidental expenses in such a case, atleast Rs.10,000/- should be awarded. For deformity of the body with the loss of leg and the social disability, Rs.5,000/- are awarded. With the medical evidence of the permanent disability of 50% due to loss of the leg, with the income of Rs.100/- per mensem or Rs.1,200/- per annum and with the age of 45 years to get multiplier of 11, the loss of income should be Rs.13,200/-. Fifty percent of it comes to Rs.6,600/-. Normally speaking, the limit being 1/6 th of the body, with the disability of 50%, the amount should be reduced. But, with the total loss of the leg, there cannot be any further reduction. Thus, Rs.6,500/- should be awarded towards the loss of income. As a whole, the claimant is entitled to recover the compensation as follows: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_63_ALT1_1997Html1.htm</FRM> Thus, the award deserves to be set aside or modified accordingly.