The High Court
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6351 MFA No. 6679 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6679 OF 2014(MV-I) …APPELLANT BETWEEN: LOKESHAPPA @ B.V. LOKESH, S/O. VEERABHADRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, R/O BANDIKOPPALU VILLAGE, PATTANAGERE POST, KASABA HOBLI, KADUR TALUK, CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT-577 548. (BY SRI. SRIKANTH PATIL K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. K. P. MOHAN, S/O PARAMESHWARAPPA, AGE: 28 YEARS, R/AT SAKHARYAPATNA VILLAGE AND POST, KADUR TALUK, CHIKMAGALUR DIST-577 548. 2. H. SOMASHEKAR, S/O HANUMANTHAPPA, R/AT BANOOR VILLAGE, SAKHARAYAPATNA HOBLI, KADUR TALUK, CHIKMAGALUR DIST-577 548. 3. FUTURE GENERAL INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., UNIT 201 AND 202, INLAND AVENUE, 2ND FLOOR, BALA BAGH, OPP. HERO HONDA SHOW ROOM, M.G. ROAD, MANGALORE-575001.
Legal Reasoning
heads is low, having considered the nature of injuries sustained and the evidence produced, this Court is of the view that the compensation granted under all other heads requires no - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:6351 MFA No. 6679 of 2014 interference. Thus, the enhancement will be an extent of Rs.1,93,515/- (Rs.1,72,515/- + Rs.21,000/-).
Arguments
(BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R3; NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 IS DISPENSED WITH, V/O. DATED 21.01.2015) …RESPONDENTS Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6351 MFA No. 6679 of 2014 THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 08.07.2014 PASSED MVC NO.157/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, AT KUDUR, CHIKMAGALUR DISTRICT, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION. IN THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA ORAL JUDGMENT Heard Sri.Raghu R. who represents Sri.Srikanth Patil K., learned counsel on record for the appellant as well as Sri.B.Pradeep, learned counsel for respondent No.3. 2. The claimant in MVC No.157/2010 which was dealt with by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kadur and was disposed of through order dated 08.07.2014 is before this Court through this appeal. The appellant seeks for enhancement of compensation. The Tribunal through the impugned order awarded a sum of Rs.3,82,573/- as compensation. The version of the appellant is that he is entitled to a higher sum. 3. Arguing the matter, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant sustained grievous injuries - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6351 MFA No. 6679 of 2014 in a road traffic accident. He took treatment as an inpatient at different hospitals for about two months. The appellant, as an agriculturist was earning huge sum by the date of accident. However, the Tribunal took the notional income of the appellant as Rs.3,000/- per month. Learned counsel states that the accident occurred in the year 2010 and for the relevant period the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income as Rs.5,500/- per month and atleast said figure should have been considered by the Tribunal. Learned counsel also states that the compensation granted by the Tribunal under all other heads is also grossly low. Learned counsel thereby seeks for enhancement of compensation. 4. The submission that is made by learned counsel for respondent No.3 on the other hand is that the Tribunal subjecting the entire evidence to scrutiny has came to a just conclusion and therefore the award of the Tribunal needs no interference. 5. The Tribunal, considering the evidence that is brought on record i.e., the evidence of PW1, CW1, Exs.P1 to P203 and Exs.C1 to C4 came to a conclusion that the appellant - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6351 MFA No. 6679 of 2014 is entitled to a sum of Rs.3,82,573/- as compensation divided under following heads: Sl. No 1 Heads of compensation Pain and Sufferings Amount in Rs. 50,000/- 2 Medical Expenses 1,37,013/- 3 4 5. Traveling/Conveyance Expenses Attendant Charges and Nutritious Food Loss of Income during treatment / rest period Loss of Future Income Future Medical Expenses Towards discomfort and loss of amenities of life Total 6 7 8 10,000/- 10,000/- 12,000/- 1,33,560/- 20,000/- 10,000/- Rs.3,82,573/- 6. The appellant by all the evidence produced has established that he sustained fracture of left tibia, fracture of left pubic Rami and injury to the spinal cord. The appellant also succeeded in establishing that he took treatment as an inpatient for about 53 days. Having considered the nature of injuries sustained and the treatment taken, this Court is of the view that the appellant would have taken bed rest atleast for a period of six months. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:6351 MFA No. 6679 of 2014 7. Coming to the occupation and earnings of the appellant by the date of accident, as per his version, as an agriculturist, he was earning Rs.1,50,000/- per annum. However, the appellant failed to establish his actual earnings by the date of accident. But, having considered the submission that is made by the learned counsel for the appellant, this Court is of the view that the notional income of the appellant is required to be taken as Rs.5,500/- per month. Thus, loss of earnings during laid up period comes to Rs.33,000/- (5,500/- x 6). The Tribunal through the impugned order awarded a sum of Rs.12,000/- only under the head loss of income during laid up period. Thus, enhancement will be Rs.21,000/- (Rs.33,000/- - Rs.12,000/-). 8. Coming to loss of future earnings, basing on the evidence of CW1, the Tribunal took the disability in respect of whole body as 26.5% which need no interference. Having considered the age of the appellant as 44 years by the date of accident, as per the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Others, reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, 25% of the earnings are required to be added towards future prospects. Also the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:6351 MFA No. 6679 of 2014 multiplier which is required to be applied as per the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sarla Verma and Others v. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another reported in 2009 SAR (Civ) 592 is '14'. Thus, loss of future earnings on calculation will be as under: Description Income per month Annual income(5,500x12) Add 25% towards future prospects (66,000+25%) Applying multiplier '14'(82,500x14) Loss of permanent disability in whole body being 26.5% future earnings, physical respect of the appropriate Amount Rs. 5,500-00 66,000-00 82,500-00 11,55,000-00 03,06,075-00 The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.1,33,560/- only under the head loss of future income. Thus, enhancement will be Rs.1,72,515/- (Rs.3,06,075/- - Rs.1,33,560/-). 9. Though, learned counsel for the appellant states that the compensation granted by the Tribunal under all other
Decision
10. Thus, the appeal is disposed of with the following ORDER (i) The appeal is allowed in part. (ii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kadur, through orders in MVC No.157/2010 dated 08.07.2014 is enhanced by Rs.1,93,515/-. (iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. (iv) Respondent No.3 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of 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 AP CT:TSM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 51