- (1.) THIS appeal is by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the MACT, Madikeri in MVC 242/1997. Claimant Manu Prasad @ Avinash who was aged about 10 years was walking by the side of the road near his house at Madapatna on 1-9-1997 at about 12. 45 p. m. due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle No. KA-09-9697 he sustained injuries in the road traffic accident to his head, waist, hip, back etc. He was immediately shifted to Government hospital, Kushalnagar and thereafter he was shifted to B. M. Hospital, mysore, he was there as in-patient for about 31 years (sic days ). He under-went major surgery on the fore-head and jaws. On the advise, he took ayurvedic treatment at Sheerangal, Kushalanagar Taluk for a period of three months. He was also taking treatment with neuro surgeons by name dr. M. S. Bhaskar and one Gupta who was a physchiatrist respectively. Thereafter, he was admitted to Nimhans for more than a year for his abnormal behaviour and the doctors diagnosed and opined no conscious kccr 2007 (4) P - 23 - 163 present and conduct disorder and again he was admitted to KR Hospital, mysore, for post-traumatric syndrome (post head injury) since the attention of the claimant was shifting frequently. He was treated for a long period by Dr. Shobha Srinath, Physchiatrist, Neuro Surgery Department at nimhans and also by Dr. Vidyasagar, Neuro Phychologist. According to them, organic personality of the claimant is changed, more of frontal lobe functions being affected and disability of 75% to 80% in scholastics skill ; and he cannot live independently. He was also treated at Dental College, sullya and Kushalangar for the injuries sustained by him. He was also treated by a Radiologist at Mysore, he was in continuous treatment for more than 5 years and still on treatment. Before the tribunal two doctors were examined to show the disability caused to the claimant, one is dr. Shobha Srinath and another is Dr. Vidyasagar. These two witnesses were examined on commission by the tribunal. According to the father of the claimant, he has spent more than Rs. 4 lacs on medical treatment and further amount is required for future medical expenses. According to him, claimant cannot live independently and he has to depend upon another person for his day-to-day affairs. According to Dr. Shobha Srinath, cognitive school level of the claimant is only 20-25% and the disability is 75 to 80% in scholastic skill and in regard to his emotional behaviour he is unable to control his impulses and he will suddenly provocated even for simple causes and he cannot live independently. According to Dr. Vidyasagar, claimant is having poor spatial orientation, abstract ability, reasoning by analogy, his concept of forming ability is found to be inadequate, he has got difficulty in counting and conceptualising quantities and associated numbers. He is learning through trial and error method, he belongs to the category of mild trade mental retardation, normal IQ range of a person would be between 90 and 110 whereas IQ level of the claimant is 68. He needs help from others and he has to be trained by a qualified professional and that he cannot lead an independent quality based life without the help of parents. Evidence of Dr. Shobha Srinath and Dr. Vidyasagar is not challenged since they were not cross-examined by the Advocates who appeared for the respondent before the tribunal. With these disabilities, inspite of leading evidence the tribunal without considering the compensation to be awarded on different heads, forgetting medical bills produced by the claimants which are running to lacs of rupees, tribunal has awarded a meager sum of Rs. 50,000/- with interest at 6% p. a. , Being not satisfied with the award of the tribunal, present appeal is filed seeking enhancement of compensation.
(2.) HAVING heard the Counsel for the parties and on perusal of oral and documentary evidence let in by the claimant which we have referred to in the earlier paragraph, we are of the opinion that the appeal of the claimant has to be allowed and just and proper compensation is required to be awarded based on the evidence and disability caused to the claimant.
(3.) THE boy was aged about 10 years on the date of the accident and he was studying in school. He has to be looked after for the rest of his life by any one of the members of the family. In other words, he is not only a burden to himself and he is also burden to the family. Considering the nature and sufferings and the date of accident, we are inclined to award a sum of Rs. 50,000/- under the head pain and sufferings. The claimant had produced medical bills for a sum of Rs. 1,11,000/ -. In addition to that, we have to see the expenses incurred by the claimant's parents under the head attendant's charges, conveyance, nourishment and stay at Bangalore, mysore and in different places for over a period of 4 years. Therefore, we are inclined to award a sum of Rs. 3 lacs under the head medical expenses, conveyance and attendant's charges. Since life of a young boy is taken away and he has to be continued as a child till his death since he cannot enjoy his life, we are inclined to award a sum of Rs. 1 lac under the head loss of amenities in life. We are also inclined to award further sum of Rs. l lac under the head future medical expenses as he requires constant medical check-up with psychiatrist for which he has to come all the way from kushalangar to Bangalore or to Mysore with parents and for their stay either in Mysore or in Bangalore during the period of treatment. We cannot assess the loss of income because the tribunal or this Court cannot guess what was the future of the boy. However, we are of the opinion that atleast a sum of Rs. 3 lacs has to be awarded under the future loss of income since he has to depend upon others for his livelihood for the rest of his life and one attendant is required till his death as he cannot live independent life. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the claimant is entitled for a sum of 8 lacs with interest at 6% p. a.;