The High Court · 2013
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:25106 MFA No. 9198 of 2013 HC-KAR IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 9198 OF 2013 (MV-I) BETWEEN: SRI. ANNAPPA S/O CHIKKAHONNEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, MALALIKERE KOPPALU, KASABA HOBLI, ARAKALAGUD TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT, PRESENTLY R/AT MANGALA LODGE, SAMPIGE ROAD, HASSAN CITY. HASSAN - 573 201. (BY SRI. H.J. ANANDA, ADVOCATE) AND: …APPELLANT Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka 1. SRI. RANGASWAMY, S/O RAMEGOWDA, UDDURU VILLAGE, G.H. KERE POST, KASABA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201. 2. THE MANAGER RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, KRUTHIKA ARCHADE, N.R.CIRCLE, HOLENARASIPURA ROAD, HASSAN TALUK, HASSAN DISTRICT - 573 201.
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. D. VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 11.03.2014, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) …RESPONDENTS - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:25106 MFA No. 9198 of 2013 HC-KAR THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 03.04.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.811/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDITIONAL MACT, HASSAN, 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 UMESH M ADIGA ORAL JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the claimant against the judgment and award dated 3rd April 2013, passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and M.A.C.T., Hassan, (for short `the Tribunal'), in MVC No.811/2011. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal. 3. Brief facts of the case are that, on 28.01.2011, in the afternoon the claimant met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of the autorickshaw bearing registration No.KA-13-140 by its driver at B.M. Road, Hassan. Due to the impact claimant sustained L2 - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:25106 MFA No. 9198 of 2013 HC-KAR Compression fracture with Parapersis i.e., weakness in the lower body. He took treatment as inpatient for four days from 28.01.2011 to 01.02.2011 and he took follow up treatment. He had spent more than Rs.1,00,000/- towards medical expenses. He was aged 24 years and he was serving as a Lift Operator. Due to injuries sustained in the accident, he has been suffering from permanent disability. With these reasons prays to award the compensation. 4. Respondent No.1 is the owner and Respondent No.2 is the insurer of the offending vehicle. Respondent No.1 remained ex-parte before the Tribunal. Respondent No.2 denied the contents of the claim petition, it also denied its liability to pay compensation and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition. 5. Tribunal framed necessary issues. Claimant to prove his case examined two witnesses as PW.1 and 2 and - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:25106 MFA No. 9198 of 2013 HC-KAR marked Exs.P1 to P12. Respondent No.2 has not led oral or documentary evidence. 6. After hearing both the parties and appreciating the evidence on record, the Tribunal held that accident took place due to negligence of driver of the Autorickshaw. The Tribunal assessed the age of the claimant as 24 years and took the monthly income at Rs.4,500/- and assessed the disability at 8% to the whole body, applied the multiplier `18' and awarded the following compensation:- Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain and sufferings Medical expenses Special extra Nourishment, and conveyance charges nursing, diet, 20,000/- 33,900/- 10,000/- Attendant charges 6,000/- Loss of income during treatment/rest 9,000/- Loss of amenities Compensation towards loss of future earnings 10,000/- 77,760/- Total 1,63,660/- - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:25106 MFA No. 9198 of 2013 HC-KAR 7. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant and respondent No.2. 8. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the Tribunal has not considered the income and disability properly and therefore, the amount of compensation awarded under most of the heads are inadequate. Hence, prayed to enhance the compensation. 9. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 Sri D. Vijayakumar, submits that the Tribunal has taken care of all the points and rightly awarded the compensation, hence it does not call for any interference by this Court. 10. Claimant has not been suffering from any functional disability due to the said injuries. Therefore, even awarding of compensation under the 'head loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability' is also not proper. However, Insurance Company has not - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:25106 MFA No. 9198 of 2013 HC-KAR preferred any appeal against the impugned judgment. Therefore, whatever amount of compensation awarded is just and proper and prayed for dismissal of the appeal. 11. On reappreciating the materials placed on record, it is felt that amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. If we follow the notional income chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, the income of the claimant can be taken at Rs.6,500/- per month. As per the evidence of PW.2, claimant has sustained compression fracture of L2. PW.2 was the treated Doctor and according to him he was suffering from weakness in both the lower limbs Grade 4. Considering the said evidence of PW.2, permanent disability assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side. The amount of compensation awarded under other heads are also inadequate. Therefore, they require enhancement. - 7 - NC: 2025:KHC:25106 MFA No. 9198 of 2013 HC-KAR 12. Accordingly, following amount of compensation is awarded: Particulars Amount in Rs. Pain and sufferings Medical expenses Special diet, conveyance and attendant charges 40,000/- 33,900/- 20,000/- Loss of income during laid up period 19,500/- (Rs.6,500/- x 3) Loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability 1,40,400/- (Rs.6,500/- x 12 x 18x 10%) Loss of amenities and unhappiness 25,000/- Total 2,78,800/- Amount awarded by the Tribunal 1,63,660/- Enhancement- 1,15,140/- Rounded off- 1,15,000/-
Decision
13. In the result, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Appeal is allowed in part. - 8 - NC: 2025:KHC:25106 MFA No. 9198 of 2013 HC-KAR ii) The judgment and award dated 3rd April 2013, passed in MVC.No.811/2011, by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and M.A.C.T., Hassan, stands modified. iii) The claimant is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.1,15,000/-, with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. on the enhanced amount, from the date of petition till its realization. iv) The respondent No.2 - Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of six weeks from the date of award. v) The remaining portion of the award of the Tribunal shall remain unaltered. vi) Draw award accordingly. 14. Registry is directed to send back the records along with a copy of this judgment to the concerned Tribunal. Sd/- (UMESH M ADIGA) JUDGE NG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8 CT: BHK