1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1-Insurance Company.

2. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and award dated 23.05.2014 passed in M.V.C.No.1843/2013 on the file of the XII Additional Small Causes Judge & Member, SCCH-8, at Bengaluru (‘the Tribunal’ for short).

3. The parties are referred to as per their original rankings before the Tribunal to avoid confusion and for the convenience of the Court.

4. The factual matrix of the case of the claimant before the Tribunal is that he met with an accident on 21.01.2013 and suffered the permanent disability.

5. In support of his claim, he examined himself as P.W.1 and also examined the Doctor as P.W.2, who assessed the disability of 9% to the whole body. The Tribunal considering the material taken the income of Rs.5,000/- per month, considered only 5% disability and awarded compensation in all together Rs.1,11,300/-. Hence, the present appeal is filed by the appellant – claimant.

6. The main contention of the claimant before this Court is that he has suffered fracture of 4th and 5th proximal phalanx of right hand and open fracture proximal 1/3rd of shaft of radius. Apart from that, there were five other injuries viz., lacerated wound over right elbow joint, lacerated wound over right little finger, abrasion over right, ring middle and over index finger, lacerated wound over dorsum of right hand and right upper limb-avulsion injury-crushed anterior part of elbow, loss of muscles exposed. It is contended that he was an inpatient for a period of one month and the meager compensation of Rs.1,11,300/- had been awarded. Hence, it requires an interference of this Court

7. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Insurance Company would submit that the matter was considered in the Lok Adalath for an amount of Rs.1,75,000/- but the matter was not settled in the Lok Adalath. Hence, it does not require any interference.

8. Having heard the respective counsel and on perusal of the material available on record, there were fracture of 4th and 5 th proximal phalanx of right hand and open fracture proximal 1/3rd of shaft of radius. Apart from that, there were five other injuries viz., lacerated wound over right elbow joint, lacerated wound over right little finger, abrasion over right, ring middle and over index finger, lacerated wound over dorsum of right hand and right upper limb-avulsion injury-crushed anterior part of elbow, loss of muscles exposed. The Doctor has assessed the disability of 26.296% to the right lower limb and 9% to the whole body. The Tribunal failed to take note of the nature of injuries suffered by the claimant. He was an inpatient for a period of one month from 23.01.2013 to 23.02.2013 and he had undergone wound debridement surgery. The Tribunal also failed to take note of the long period of treatment i.e., one month. However, awarded only an amount of Rs.25,000/- on the head of pain and sufferings, the same is enhanced to Rs.50,000/-.

9. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.12,300/- towards medical expenses, which is based on the documentary evidence. Hence, it does not require any interference.

10. However, the Tribunal committed an error in awarding compensation of Rs.10,000/- towards Conveyance, Special Diet and Attendant Charges. Since he was an inpatient for a period of 30 days, it is appropriate to enhance the same to Rs.30,000/-.

11. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.10,000/- towards Loss of income during laid up period for a period of two months. Having considered the fact that he was an inpatient for a period of one month and suffered the fracture of 4th and 5th proximal phalanx of right hand and open fracture proximal 1/3rd of shaft of radius, it requires a minimum period of four months time for uniting the fractures and for rest. It is an accident of the year 2013, the notional income would be Rs.8,000/- per month. Having taken the notional income of Rs.8,000/- per month for a period of four months, it comes to Rs.32,000/- (8000x4) as against Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

12. The Tribunal also committed an error in taking the disability. When the claimant has suffered the fracture of radius as well as two fractures of metacarpacl i.e., of 4th and 5th proximal phalanx of right hand and open fracture proximal 1/3rd of shaft of radius and also he has suffered lacerated wound over right elbow joint, lacerated wound over right little finger, abrasion over right, ring middle and over index finger, lacerated wound over dorsum of right hand and right upper limb-avulsion injury-crushed anterior part of elbow, loss of muscles exposed, though the Doctor has assessed the disability of 9%, which is also on lesser side, the Tribunal has committed an error in only taking 5% disability. Hence, it is appropriate to take the disability of 13%. Having taken the disability of 13%, the notional income of Rs.8,000/- per month, he is aged about 21 years at the time of the accident, the relevant multiplier applicable would be 18, the loss of future income due to disability comes to Rs.2,24,640/- (8000x12x18x13/100).

13. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation on the head of ‘Loss of Amenities’. Hence, it is appropriate to award an amount of Rs.30,000/- on the head of ‘Loss of Amenities’.

14. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the following:

ORDER

(i) The appeal is allowed-in-part.

(ii) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal dated 23.05.2014 passed in M.V.C.No.1843/2013 is modified granting compensation of Rs.3,78,940/- as against Rs.1,11,300/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realisation.

(iii) The respondent – Insurance Company is directed to pay the compensation amount with interest within six weeks from today.

(iv) The Registry is directed to transmit the records to the concerned Tribunal, forthwith.