Madhya Pradesh High Court
Kailash vs Om Prakash Yadav And Ors. on 10 May, 2002
Equivalent citations: I(2003)ACC381, 2003(3)MPHT58
ORDER Subhash Samvatsar, J.
1. This appeal is filed by the claimant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act for enhancement of compensation against the award dated 9-9-98 passed in Claims Case No. 49/95, of the Court of Third Additional Member/ Judge, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Shivpuri.
2 The brief facts of the case are that : on 16-1-1995, the appellant claimant was travelling in a bus bearing No. M.P. 07B/8386 which met with an accident. Due to the said accident the appellant suffered grievous injuries and one of his hands was fractured and remained under plaster for 45 days. He was also suffered other injuries of grievous nature. The appellant filed a claim petition before the Claims Tribunal for compensation for the injuries sustained by him. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 25,612/- to the appellant/claimant. Out of the said amount Rs. 612/- was awarded towards treatment while Rs. 25,000/-was awarded towards compensation. The Claims Tribunal in Para 42 of its judgment has held that the injuries caused to the appellant has resulted 30% permanent disablement, due to which, the income of the appellant is reduced from Rs. 70/- per day to Rs. 30/- per day.
3. The appellant has examined Dr. R.S. Gupta (A.W. 20) to prove the nature of injuries. Shri Gupta in Para 2 of his statement has stated that he has examined the claimant and found three lacerated wounds on his body and he has issued a report (Ex. P-3). Ex. P-13 is the disablement certificate issued by the same doctor. After appreciating the medical evidence on record, the Tribunal has held that the appellant has suffered 30% permanent injury. This finding is not challenged before me by any of the parties.
4. Now, the only question, which is under challenge is regarding the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal. In Para 43 of the Award the Claims Tribunal has specifically stated that an amount of Rs. 25,000/- is awarded to the claimant/appellant on the basis of no fault liability and Rs. 612/- towards medical expenses. Awarding an amount of Rs. 25,000/- in this case is not in accordance with law because in reply to issue No. 1, the Tribunal has given a specific finding that the accident has occurred due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 1, and, therefore, the principle of no fault liability will not be applicable in the present case. As already discussed above, as per the finding of the Claims Tribunal, the appellant/claimant has suffered a loss of income to the extent of Rs. 40/- per day and his age on the date of accident was only 26 years.
5. The next question before me is to decide what method should be adopted for assessing compensation for the injuries sustained by the appellant. The legislature has incorporated Section 163A in the Motor Vehicles Act. The said section reads as under :--
"Section 163A. Special provisions as to payment of compensation on structured formula basis.--(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or in any other law for the time being in force or instrument having the force of law, the owner of the motor vehicle or the authorised insurer shall be liable to pay in the case of death or permanent disablement due to accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, compensation, as indicated in the Second Schedule, to the legal heirs or the victim, as the case may be.
Explanation :--For the purposes of this sub-section, "permanent disability" shall have the same meaning and extent as in the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (8 of 1923).
(2) In any claim for compensation under Sub-section (1), the claimant shall not be required to plead or establish that the death or permanent disablement in respect of which the claim has been made was, due to any wrongful act or neglect or default of the owner of the vehicle or vehicles concerned or of any other person.
(3) The Central Government may, keeping in view the cost of living by notification in the Official Gazette, from time to time amend the Second Schedule."
A bare reading of this Section will make it clear that Section 163A applies not only in above cases but also in case of injuries sustained by the claimant. Explanation to Section 163A also provides that claim of compensation in respect of accident involving death or bodily injury to a person arising out of use of motor vehicle includes the claim on compensation under Sections 140 and 163A of the M.V. Act. However, Section 163B bars the application of Section 163A, in case the claimant has claimed compensation under Section 140 of M.V. Act. Thus there is no manner of doubt that final assessment of compensation in case of bodily injury or in death cases can be made on the basis of the Schedule framed under Section 163A.
6. This High Court as well as the Supreme Court has applied the multiplier of 16 in number of cases for assessment compensation in injury cases.
7. This Court in a case Kuldeep Singh v. Mubarik Hussain, reported in 1998 (I) M.P.W.N. Note-102, has applied a multiplier system for assessing compensation in case of injuries in the said case, the claimant has suffered a permanent disablement to the extent of 46% and was of 25 years of age. The appellant was earning Rs. 2000/- per month. After applying the multiplier of 14 the Court has awarded Rs. 84,000/- for the injuries sustained by him.
8. In the present case, the loss of earning which is Rs. 40/- per day as per the finding of the Tribunal, can be assessed to Rs. 1,000/- per month, i.e., after excluding non-working days. Thus, the yearly loss of income comes to Rs. 12,000/-, per year and if a multiplier of 18 (as per Schedule-2) is applied then the compensation will come to Rs. 2,16,000/-. Since the appellant has suffered 30% permanent disablement, the amount will further reduce by 30%. Thus the amount of compensation comes to Rs. 72,000/-.
9. The Supreme Court in the case of Ashwani Kumar Mishra v. P. Muniam Babu and Ors., reported in AIR 1999 SC 2260, has adopted a multiplier system for assessing compensation in the case of injuries. Section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act also provides for assessing compensation in case of injuries as per Schedule-2 framed in the Motor Vehicles Act.
10. The amount of Rs. 612/- awarded by the learned Tribunal towards medical expenses are also on the lower side. It is true that the claimant in the present case has not submitted his medical bills towards his treatment, still the Tribunal can reasonably assessed the expenses accrued in treatment. Looking to the fact that the appellant had fracture and had undergone a prolonged treatment and the fact that he has suffered 30% permanent disablement, an amount of Rs. 8,000/- towards expenses are just and fair. Thus, the amount of compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal is enhanced from Rs. 25,612/- to Rs. 80,000/-. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of accident till the realisation.
11. Thus, the appeal is allowed. The amount of compensation is enhanced as indicated above, with no orders as to costs.