✦ Karnataka High Court

KUM. PRITHVI D @ SWATHI v. COURT OF KARNATAKA

Case at a glance

Outcome

Allowed

The appeal is allowed in part

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 77. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: O R D E R i) ii) The appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 2nd December 2013 passed in MVC No.2882/2012, on the file of XVIII Additional Judge, Court of…

Judgment

#2. MR. SUBRAMANI D S/O DORAI P MAJOR, R/AT NO.432, CHT LANE, ILYAS NAGAR, KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 078 (BY SRI.LAKSHMINARAYAN C.,ADVOCATE FOR R-1; …RESPONDENTS - 2 - NC: 2024:KHC:48738 MFA No. 6222 of 2014 NOTICE TO R-2 IS DISPENSED WITH V.O.D 31.01.2015) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 2.12.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.2882/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE 18TH ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND MEMBER, MACT-4, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION OF COMPENSATION. ENHANCEMENT SEEKING AND THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the appellant-claimant challenging the judgment and award dated 2nd December, 2013 passed in MVC No.2882/2012 on the file of XVIII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes and Member, MACT-4, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for brevity), seeking enhancement of compensation.

#2. Heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for respondent No.1 - insurance company and perused the material on record. - 3 - NC: 2024:KHC:48738 MFA No. 6222 of 2014

#3. The occurrence of the accident, injuries sustained by the claimant and coverage of insurance are not in dispute. For having sustained injuries due to the accident, the Tribunal has granted compensation under various heads as follows: i) ii) Towards pain and suffering Rs.30,000/- Loss of amenities & happiness Rs.20,000/- iii) Medical and incidental charges Rs.60,000/- iv) Permanent disability Rs.85,000/- Total ……………….. Rs.1,95,000/-

#4. In the present case, from the medical evidence on record, it is proved that the claimant had suffered the following injuries: a) Head injury b) Fracture of right temporo-parietal bone c) Fracture of left frontal bone with hemorrhage

#5. On perusal of the material on record, it is seen that the claimant was 9 years baby girl and suffered the accidental injuries to the head and the doctor has assessed the permanent disability to the whole body at 8%. But, the Tribunal has not assessed the compensation under the head of loss of future - 4 - NC: 2024:KHC:48738 MFA No. 6222 of 2014 income due to disability, but has awarded Rs.85,000/- under the head of permanent disability. The Tribunal has not assessed the total compensation according to the established parameters and the amount of compensation awarded under various heads is on the lesser side.

#6. Considering all these factors and nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, if another sum of Rs.50,000/- is awarded in global in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, is just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

#7. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: O R D E R i) ii) The appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 2nd December 2013 passed in MVC No.2882/2012, on the file of XVIII Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes and Member, MACT-4, Bangalore, stands modified to an extent that the appellant - claimant is entitled for an additional global compensation of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees thousand only), along with interest at 6% per - 5 - NC: 2024:KHC:48738 MFA No. 6222 of 2014 annum from the date of petition till deposit, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. iii) The 1st respondent - insurance company shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. iv) v) vi) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the Tribunal shall stand intact. Draw the award accordingly. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, alongwith certified copy of the judgment passed by this Court forthwith. SD/- (HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR) JUDGE GSS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 11

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: The appeal is allowed in part

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — s. 173(1).

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.

Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Karnataka High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. MFA No. 6222 of 2014). ← Search more judgments