The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:4628 MFA No. 1111 of 2021 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1111 OF 2021 MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. SRINIVASA S/O LATE HUCCHEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/AT BEEDANNAHALLI VILLAGE, BANNURU HOBLI, T. NARASIPURA TALUK, MYSURU DISTRICT (BY SRI. NAIK KRISHNA VENKATRAMAN, ADVOCATE) …APPELLANT AND: 1. SRI. ANURAG Digitally signed by KAVYA R Location: High Court of Karnataka S/O PRAKASH SANKLA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, R/AT NO.16/11, SWAMY ALCOM, 4TH CROSS, LAKSHMI ROAD, SHANTH BENGALURU CITY, BENGALURU. 2. THE MANAGER, DELOITTE SHARED SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., DELOITTE CENTRE, ANCHORAGE 2ND 100/2, RICHMOND ROAD, BENGALURU. - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:4628 MFA No. 1111 of 2021 3. THE MANAGER, ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., NO.133, 3RD FLOOR, SHIKA TOWERS, RAMAVILAS ROAD, MYSURU-570 024. …RESPONDENTS
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. H.S. LINGARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R3; NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 ARE D/W, V/O/D 23.01.2024) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED. 28.08.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.445/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., AND MACT., T.NARASIPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is preferred by the claimant being dissatisfied with the inadequate compensation awarded by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC., and MACT., T.Narasipura - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:4628 MFA No. 1111 of 2021 (for short ‘the Tribunal’) dated 28.08.2020 in M.V.C.No.445 of 2017. 2. Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as per their status before the Tribunal. 3. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the appellant-claimant that on 15.05.2016 when the claimant was travelling in a Goods Auto bearing registration No.KA-55-2259 to sell his Goods in Madduru Market. At that time, Honda City Car bearing registration No.KA-03-MV-2746 driven by its driver came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the Goods Auto vehicle. Due to the occurrence of the accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries, fracture of both bones of right leg at lower 1/3rd and another fracture to the right clavicle and lacerated wound over right knee middle aspect, lacerated wound over right leg upper 1/3rd tibia exposed, abrasion over knee of left leg and abrasion wound over right elbow. Due to the injury suffered in the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:4628 MFA No. 1111 of 2021 road traffic accident, he filed claim petition seeking compensation against the respondents. 4. After service of notice, respondent No.1 remained absent and was placed ex-parte. Respondents No.2 and 3 filed statement of objections denying the claim of the claimant and sought for dismissal of the claim petition. 5. On the basis of materials placed on record both oral and documentary, the Tribunal awarded total compensation of Rs.4,79,099/- along with interest at 6% p.a. fixing the liability jointly and severally against respondents No.1 to 3 and directed respondent No.3- Insurance Company to pay the compensation. 6. The claimant being aggrieved by the inadequate compensation is before this Court seeking enhancement of compensation. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:4628 MFA No. 1111 of 2021 7. It is the vehement contention of the learned counsel for the appellant-claimant that the Tribunal has not considered the materials on record and also the evidence adduced by the Doctor-PW.2 who had clearly opined disability to both the limbs at 37.8% and also the Tribunal has not awarded reasonable compensation on other heads, so also the income of the claimant assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side, which requires substantial enhancement. It is also contended that the Tribunal ought to have granted future prospects in view of the magnitude of injuries suffered by the claimant. On these grounds, he seeks enhancement of compensation. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance Company contends that there is no illegality or arbitrariness in the impugned judgment and award, and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable, which does not call for interference. Therefore, no interference is required under this head by - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:4628 MFA No. 1111 of 2021 this Court. On these grounds, he seeks dismissal of the appeal. 9. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent No.2- Insurance Company. 10. The occurrence of accident, involvement of vehicle, injuries sustained by the claimant, expenditures incurred during the course of treatment is established by production of Exs.P1 to P14. Therefore, negligence is rightly attributed against the driver of the offending vehicle. 11. Now, coming to the aspect of age, avocation, income, multiplier and disability, it is seen that the age of the claimant as on the date of accident is 23 years, same has been taken by the Tribunal, appropriate multiplier is taken at '18', which is also correctly taken, does not call for interference. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:4628 MFA No. 1111 of 2021 12. The income of the claimant-appellant is taken at Rs.7,000/- per month by the Tribunal where as the notional income chart of the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority for the year 2016 prescribes Rs.9,500/- Therefore, income of the claimant is taken at Rs.9,500/- per month. 13. Doctor examined as PW.2 has opined disability to an extent of 37.8% as total permanent disability to both the limbs. It is also stated by the Doctor that, there is shortening of right lower limb to an extent of 02 cms. Therefore, the assessment made by the Tribunal in taking 1/3rd would not be appropriate to the facts and circumstances of this case as there is a disability of both the limbs to an extent of 37.8%, same will have to be divided by '2' rather than 1/3rd, therefore, 18.9% would be appropriate as against 12.6% assessed by the Tribunal. Under these circumstances, loss of future income due to disability would be Rs.3,87,828/- (Rs.9,500/- x 12 x 18 x 18.9%) as against Rs.1,90,512/-. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:4628 MFA No. 1111 of 2021 14. The Tribunal awarded Rs.30,000/- towards pain and suffering. However, this Court deems it appropriate to award Rs.50,000/- under this head. 15. The Tribunal awarded Rs.2,50,557/- towards medical expenses and future medical expenses is retained, which do not call for interference and the same is retained. 16. The Tribunal awarded Rs.5,500/- towards attendant charges, food and conveyance. However, this Court deems it appropriate to award Rs.15,000/- under this head. 17. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.2,530/- towards loss of income during the period of treatment. However, this Court deems it appropriate to award Rs.38,000/- (Rs.9,500/- x 4 months). 18. The Tribunal has failed to award compensation under the head loss of amenities, this Court deems it - 9 - NC: 2025:KHC:4628 MFA No. 1111 of 2021 appropriate to award Rs.50,000/- under the head loss of amenities. 19. In view of the above discussion, the appellant- claimant would be entitled for a total compensation of Rs.7,91,385/- as against Rs.4,79,099/- as mentioned in the table below: Heads Amount in Rs. Loss of future income Pain and sufferings Loss of amenities Food, conveyance and attendant charges Loss of income during laid-up period Medical expenses and future medical expenses 3,87,828-00 50,000-00 50,000-00 15,000-00 38,000-00 2,50,557-00 TOTAL ₹7,91,385-00 20. Accordingly, I pass the following:
Decision
ORDER i) The appeal is allowed-in-part; - 10 - NC: 2025:KHC:4628 MFA No. 1111 of 2021 ii) The judgment and award dated 28.08.2020 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC., T.Narasipura in M.V.C.No.445 of 2017 is modified; iii) The appellant-claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.7,91,385/- as against Rs.4,79,099/- awarded by the Tribunal along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum; iv) The enhanced compensation amount shall be paid by the Insurance Company-respondent No.3 within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; v) The compensation amount shall be released in favour of the appellant-claimant by way of electronic transfer upon the appellant producing relevant bank details; vi) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the Tribunal with regard to apportionment and deposit is retained; - 11 - NC: 2025:KHC:4628 MFA No. 1111 of 2021 vii) Registry to send back the entire Court records to the jurisdictional Tribunal forthwith. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE PSJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2