LAKSHMINARASIMHAIAH v. YALLAIAH

Heard Sri.Shantharaj.K, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri.Ravish Benni, learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance Company.

2. Challenge in this appeal is the order that is rendered by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ramanagara in MVC No.388/2018 dated 18.11.2022. This is a claimant's appeal. As against the claim Rs.15,00,000/-, the Tribunal through the impugned order awarded a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- as compensation and aggrieved by the same, the injured is before this Court.

3. Arguing the matter, Sri.Shantharaj.K, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant sustained multiple injuries due to the accident and got - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:33235 MFA No. 42 of 2023 treated under Pw.2. The appellant was aged about 55 years by the date of accident and as an agriculturist he earning Rs.20,000/- p.m. However without considering the occupation and earnings of the deceased by the date of accident, the Tribunal took the notional income as Rs.9,000/- p.m. which is unjustifiable. Learned counsel further states that the compensation granted under all other heads is also grossly low and therefore, just compensation may be awarded.

4. Sri.Ravish Benni, learned counsel respondent No.2 on the other hand submits that the Tribunal awarded justifiable sum as compensation and therefore, the award of the Tribunal needs no interference. Learned counsel Sri.Ravish Benni further submits that as per the wound certificate, FIR and charge sheet, the appellant was aged about 58 years by the date of accident, however, the Tribunal took the age of the appellant as 55 years by the date of accident and applied multiplier 11 which is unjustifiable. Learned counsel - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:33235 MFA No. 42 of 2023 contends that appropriate multiplier to be applied is 9 but not 11.

5. It is not in dispute that the appellant sustained simple injury over right hip, lacerated wound over left leg and abrasion over nose which are simple in nature. Equally it is not in dispute that the appellant sustained fracture of right femur which is grievous in nature. Through the evidence produced, the appellant established that he took treatment at Narayana Hospital from 22.07.2018 to

27.07.2018 and that he underwent surgery on

23.07.2018. The appellant produced the doctor who treated him before the Tribunal and got examined him as Pw.2. Pw.2 deposed with regard to the nature of injury sustained by the appellant, the treatment taken, the surgery conducted and the aspect of disability. The evidence of Pw.2 is that the disability in respect of whole body is 16%. The Tribunal basing on the contents of the oral and documentary evidence produced, assessed the age of the appellant as 55 years by the date of accident - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:33235 MFA No. 42 of 2023 and the disability in respect of whole body as 16%. The Tribunal placed reliance upon the contents of the case sheet which reveals the age as 55 years. This Court does not find any reason to discard the findings given with regard to the age of the appellant by the date of accident and the appropriate multiplier applicable.

6. Coming to the earnings of the appellant by the date of accident, no proof is produced with regard to the actual earnings and occupation. However, the submission that is made by Sri.Shantharaj.K, learned counsel for the appellant is that the accident occurred in the year 2018 and the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income for the relevant period as Rs.12,500/- per month. and therefore, the said figure requires consideration.

7. Sri.Ravish Benni, learned counsel respondent No.1 did not raise any objection for applying the said figure. Thus taking the notional income as Rs.12,500/- p.m., the age as 55 years by the date of - 6 - NC: 2024:KHC:33235 MFA No. 42 of 2023 accident, this Court is of the view that 10% of the actual earnings are required to be added towards future prospects as per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of National Insurance Company Limited Vs. Pranay Sethi and Others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680. Also appropriate multiplier to be applied is 11. There is no reason to interfere with the findings given with regard to the percentage of disability in respect of whole body as 16%. Thus the loss of future earnings due to permanent functional disability is as under: Notional monthly income Rs.12,500/- Annual income Rs.1,50,000/- Add prospects 10% towards future Rs.1,65,000/- On multiplier 11 applying appropriate Rs.18,15,000/- Permanent physical disability future being 16%, earnings is loss of Rs.2,90,400/-

8. The Tribunal through the impugned order awarded a sum of Rs.1,90,080/- towards loss of future - 7 - NC: 2024:KHC:33235 MFA No. 42 of 2023 earnings, Rs.10,000/- towards food, nourishment and attendant charges, Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.18,000/- towards loss of earnings during laid up period, Rs.10,000/- towards loss of amenities and enjoyment of life, Rs.58,776/- towards medical expenses, Rs.3,000/-towards travel expenses and Rs.10,000/- towards future medical expenses. In the light of the aforementioned discussions, the loss of future earnings to permanent functional disability comes Rs.2,90,400/-.

9. Having considered the nature of injuries sustained, this Court is of the view that the appellant would have taken bed rest at least for two months. Thus loss of earnings during laid up period comes Rs.25,000/- (Rs.12,500X2). Also the sum granted towards travelling expenses i.e., Rs.3,000/- is required to be enhanced to Rs.5,000/-.

10. Thus, the compensation which the appellant is entitled to is as under: - 8 - NC: 2024:KHC:33235 MFA No. 42 of 2023 Description Amount Sl. No 1 2 3 4 7 8 Loss of future earnings due functional to permanent disability Towards food, nourishment and attendant charges Compensation for pain and suffering Loss of earnings during laid up period 5 Loss of amenities in life 6 Medical expenses Travelling expenses Rs.2,90,400 Rs.10,000 Rs.50,000 Rs.25,000 Rs.10,000 Rs.58,776 Rs.5,000 Future Medical Expenses Rs.10,000 Total Rs.4,59,176

11. In light of forgoing discussion, following: ORDER (i) Appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ramanagara through orders in MVC No.388/2018

18.11.2022 - 9 - NC: 2024:KHC:33235 MFA No. 42 of 2023 enhanced Rs.3,50,000/- Rs.4,59,176/-. (iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of deposit. (iv) Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of 8(eight) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. (v) On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount. Sd/- (DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE NS CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10