Sri T Lokesha vs B Siddappa

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 112 Kant
Judgement Date : 5 January, 2021

Karnataka High Court
Sri T Lokesha vs B Siddappa on 5 January, 2021
Author: S.Sujatha And M.I.Arun
                           1

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

                        PRESENT

          THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA

                          AND

           THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN

               MFA NO.572 OF 2018 (MV)

BETWEEN:

SRI. T. LOKESHA
S/O THIMMAIAH @
SANNATHIMMAIAH
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
OCCUPATION COOLIE WORK
R/O HALE DYAMAVVANAHALLI
VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 501           ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI. H. ASHOK KUMAR, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1.     B. SIDDAPPA
       S/O BYRAPPA
       AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
       OCCUPATION OWNER
       OF TRACTOR AND TRAILER
       BEARING REGISTRATION
       NO.KA-16/TA-7152-7153
       R/AT HOSAKALLAHALLI VILLAGE
       CHITRADURGA TALUK
       CHITRADURGA DISTRICT - 577 501

2.     THE BRANCH MANAGER
       THE IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL
       INSURANCE CO. LTD.
       PCA AND RD BANK NO.7/432
                                2

       K. B. EXTENSION, LAWYER ROAD
       DAVANAGERE, DAVANAGERE
       DISTRICT - 577 301                     ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADV. FOR R2;
    NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)


       THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 24.05.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.1168/2016 ON THE
FILE    OF   THE   PRL.SENIOR      CIVIL    JUDGE   AND   CJM,
CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION         AND     SEEKING        ENHANCEMENT     OF
COMPENSATION


       THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
M.I.ARUN J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                           JUDGMENT

Aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 24.05.2017 passed in MVC No.1168/2016 by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, CJM and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chitradurga (for short 'the Tribunal'), the petitioner therein has preferred this appeal.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.

3

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner and few other labourers were under the employment of respondent no.1, who is owner of the tractor and trailer bearing registration No.KA-16-TA-7152-7153. As per his instructions they loaded the tractor with green manure and were traveling in the same to Halekallahalli to unload the same at the land of respondent no.1. At that time, near Dandina Kurubarahatti gate, Chitradurga Taluk, the driver of the said tractor trailer drove it in a rash and negligent manner because of which it toppled and the petitioner along with others sustained injuries. Respondent no.2 is the Insurance Company with whom the offending tractor trailer is insured.

4. Due to the accident, the petitioner had sustained swelling and tenderness over left shoulder, cut lacerated wound 2 X 1 left humerus and swelling and tenderness at left wrist. The X-ray of left shoulder with humerus shown mal- united fracture of surgical neck of left humerus and fracture of distal end of left radius. The petitioner was aged 30 years at the time of the accident. The Doctor-PW.5 has stated that the petitioner has sustained 33% permanent disability in respect of left upper limb. Based on the said deposition, the Tribunal 4 has come to the conclusion that 1/3rd of the said disability has to be taken to consider the entire bodily disability. On the said ground, it has taken 10% as permanent disability to the entire body. Further, the Tribunal, in the absence of actual proof of income has taken Rs.6,000/- per month as the notional income for calculating loss of future income due to permanent disability. It has awarded the following compensation under different heads:

Sl.No.                    Particulars                     Amount in
                                                             Rs.
     1.     Towards pain and sufferings                    30,000/-
     2.     Conveyance, Food Nourishment,                  6,000/-

Attendant charges and Medical expenses

3. Towards medical expenses 49,092/-

4. Towards loss of future income due to 1,22,400/-

permanent disability

5. Loss of amenities and unhappiness 20,000/-

6. Towards future medical expenses 10,000/-

7. Towards loss of income during laid down 12,000/-

            period
                                                Total     2,49,492/-


Not satisfied by the same, the petitioner has preferred this appeal.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5

6. It is contended by the petitioner that the amounts awarded by the Tribunal under various heads are on the lower side.

7. Per contra, respondent no.2 has justified the order of the Tribunal and sought for dismissal of the appeal.

8. The factum of accident and the injuries sustained not being in dispute, the only question that arises for consideration is regarding the quantum of compensation.

9. The accident is of the year 2015. The notional income adopted by the Tribunal at Rs.6,000/- per month is on the lower side. As per the chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority in consultation with Insurance Companies, the notional income to be adopted for the year 2015 is Rs.9,000/- per month. The disability as accepted by the Tribunal is 33% to the left upper limb of the petitioner. As a thumb rule, the Tribunal itself has stated that 1/3rd of the same has to be considered as whole body disability. In that event, 11% has to be considered as whole body disability as against 10% adopted by the Tribunal. The age of the petitioner at the time of the accident was 30 years. 6 Accordingly, a multiplier of 17 has to be adopted. Thus, towards loss of future income due to permanent disability, the petitioner would be entitled to a sum of Rs.2,01,960/- [Rs.9,000/- X 12 X 11% X 17]. We also find that the compensation awarded under certain other heads are also on the lower side. Hence, we deem it appropriate to award Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering, Rs.15,000/- towards conveyance, food, nourishment and attendant charges, Rs.27,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period and Rs.50,000/- towards loss of amenities and unhappiness. We deem it appropriate to hold that the compensation awarded towards medical expenses at Rs.49,092/- and future medical expenses at Rs.10,000/- to be appropriate. Thus, in all, the petitioner would be entitled to a compensation of Rs.4,03,052/- as against Rs.2,49,492/- awarded by the Tribunal. We also deem it appropriate to award 6% interest on the enhanced compensation amount from the date of petition till its realization. Accordingly, the following:

ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed in part.
      ii)       The    total        compensation       awarded    by     the
                Tribunal       is     modified     and     enhanced       to
                                  7

              Rs.4,03,052/-       (Rupees       Four     Lakhs     Three
              Thousand        Fifty     Two     only)     as     against
Rs.2,49,492/- which shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the claim petition till its realization.
iii) The portion of the order of the Tribunal inasmuch as liability and disbursement remains intact.
iv) The insurance company shall deposit the amount determined as aforesaid before the Tribunal within 90 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the judgment and order.
v) The modified compensation amount shall be disbursed in terms of the order of the Tribunal.
vi) Draw modified award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-

JUDGE hkh.