IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
M.F.A.No.1990/2018 (MV)
BETWEEN :
REVANNA SIDDAPPA S.,
S/O SIDDA LINGAIAH,
AGED 41 YEARS,
R/AT THIRUMALE MAIN ROAD,
MAGADI TOWN, MAGADI TALUK,
RAMANAGARAM DISTRICT-562120 ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI D.S.SRIDHAR, ADV.)
AND :
1. MUNIRAJU M.V.,
S/O MUNIVENKATAIAH, MAJOR,
R/AT # 54, SHIVANAHALLI,
VADDARA DODDI VILLAGE,
BANNIKUPPE POST, KAILANCHA HOBLI,
RAMANAGARA TALUK & DISTRICT-571511
2. M/s NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
R O # 144, 2ND FLOOR,
SUBHARAM COMPLEX,
M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU-560001
REP BY ITS MANAGER ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.GEETHA RAJ, ADV. FOR R-2; R-1 SERVED.)
-2-
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF
M.V.ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
13.10.2017 PASSED IN MVC No.660/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE
XIX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND MACT,
BENGALURU (SCCH-17), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
S. SUJATHA, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 13.10.2017 passed in MVC No.660/2016 on the file of the XIX Addl. Sr. Civil Judge & MACT, Bangalore (SCCH-17) [Tribunal for short].
2. The claimant instituted the petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation for the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident.
3. It was averred that on 31.8.2015 at about 7.45 a.m. while the claimant was riding the motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KA-42/R-2404 on Thirumale- Panakanakallu Road, Magadi Town, at that time a -3- speeding motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KA-42-Q-3168 came from opposite direction and dashed to the motor cycle in which the claimant was riding. Due to the said impact, he fell down and sustained injuries. He was shifted to Government Hospital, Magadi wherein first aid was administered and then to BGS Hospital wherein he took treatment as an inpatient. It was contended that the claimant was earning Rs.20,000/- per month doing agriculture. Due to the accidental injuries, he became disabled and he is not able to perform his work as earlier which indeed has adversely affected him mentally, physically and financially.
4. On these set of facts and grounds, compensation was sought by the claimant.
5. On issuance of notice, the 2nd respondent owner of the vehicle has failed to appear and was placed exparte. At the instance of the claimant, 1st and 3rd respondents were deleted and the 4th respondent was -4- impleaded. 4th respondent resisted the claim by filing written statement denying the petition averments. It was contended that false complaint was filed after 16 days of the alleged accident which shows false implication of the insured motor cycle in collusion with the owner of the insured motor cycle to make wrongful gain. Without prejudice to the said contentions, it was contended that the claimant was himself negligent in not following the traffic regulations. Accordingly, he prayed for dismissal of the petition.
6. On the basis of the pleadings, issues were framed and answered allowing the petition in part awarding compensation of Rs.13,59,211/- with interest @ 7.5% p.a. (excluding future medical expenses) from the date of petition till its realization.
7. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimant has preferred the present appeal.
-5-
8. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the Tribunal has awarded meager compensation under different heads. Having regard to the nature of injuries and its impact for the rest of his life, the compensation awarded is disproportionate and the same requires to be enhanced substantially.
9. Learned counsel for the insurer submitted that on profuse analysis of the material evidence, the Tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation and the same does not call for interference by this court. Accordingly, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.
10. We have carefully considered the rival submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the original records.
11. The factum of accident and the injuries sustained by the claimant in the road traffic accident in -6- question are not in dispute. It is borne out from the records that the claimant has suffered the following injuries:
i) Left fronto temporo parietal SDH & EDH,
ii) Right front temporal contusion and
iii) Right great toe distral phalynx and EHL avulsion. He also suffered a cut lacerated wound sutured over forehead outside and bilateral black eye and right toe laceration.
12. As per the medical records, the said injuries are grievous in nature. The claimant has taken treatment as an inpatient at BGS Global Hospital from 31.8.2015 to 16.9.2015. He underwent left FTPL decompressive craniotomy and evacuation of EDH under general anesthesia. He got admitted for second time on 20.9.2015 and discharged on 22.9.2015. Again he got admitted on 19.10.2015 and discharged on 22.10.2015 and he was subjected to bone flap -7- replacement. He underwent left fronto temporo parietal autologus cranioplasty under general anesthesia on 22.10.2015. Thus, the medical records would disclose that he has taken treatment for 25 days under general anesthesia on multiple occasions.
13. Having regard to the nature of injures sustained by the claimant, the disability was assessed at 42% to the whole body by Dr.Sreedhara who was examined as PW-3. Considering the same, the Tribunal has determined the permanent physical disability of the claimant at 30% which in our view requires to be re- considered in the light of the injuries sustained as aforesaid and the disability assessed by the doctor. In our considered view, it would be appropriate to determine the permanent disability to the whole body at 35%.
14. Re-determining the monthly income of the injured at Rs.9,000/- per month in terms of the chart -8- prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority which is consistently followed by this Court in the absence of proof of income, while determining the monthly income of the injured in the road traffic accident, taking the physical disability at 35%, applying the multiplier of 15 considering the age of the injured as 40 years, loss of future income due to permanent disability would work to Rs.5,67,000/- (9000 x 12 x 35% x 15).
15. In view of the re-determination of monthly income of Rs.9,000/-, the loss of income during laid up period is re-assessed at Rs.45,000/-. It is obvious that the claimant has to forego many of the amenities for the rest of his life and has to suffer the inconvenience due to the accidental injuries. Hence, we deem it appropriate to award compensation of Rs.50,000/- towards future amenities and happiness. It is reasonable to award a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards future medical expenses. In all other respects the compensation awarded by the - -9- Tribunal under different heads remains intact. The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal is re-assessed as under:
Sl.No. Particulars Amount [in Rs.] Towards pain and
1. 75,000 suffering Towards attendant
2. charges, extra food and 35,000 conveyance expenses Towards medical
3. 7,96,211 expenses Loss of Income during 45,000
4. laid up period Loss of income due to
5. 5,67,000 permanent disability Loss of future amenities
6. 50,000 and happiness Towards future medical
7. 25,000 expenses Total 15,93,211
16. Thus, the claimant is entitled to compensation of Rs.15,93,211/- with interest @ 6% p.a. on the enhanced compensation.
17. Hence, the following:
- 10 -
ORDER
i] Appeal is allowed in part.
ii] The total compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is modified and enhanced to
Rs.15,93,211/- as against Rs.13,59,211/-
which shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation from the date of the claim petition till its realization.
iii] The insurance company shall deposit the re-
assessed total compensation determined as aforesaid before the Tribunal within 90 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the judgment and order.
iv] The portion of the order of the Tribunal inasmuch as liability and disbursement remains intact.
- 11 -
v] The modified compensation shall be disbursed in terms of the order of the Tribunal.
vi] Draw modified award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE Dvr: