Karnataka High Court
Shivu S/O Budappa vs Siddayya And Anr on 3 July, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4554
MFA No. 202146 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 3 RD DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA
MISC. FIRST APPEAL NO.202146 OF 2018 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SHIVU S/O BUDAPPA
AGE: 26 YEARS, OCC: MASON (NOW NIL),
R/O. NEAR RAMASWAMY HOUSE,
HARIJANWADA, IQBAL NAGAR,
RAICHUR-584101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI BASAVARAJ R. MATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SIDDAYYA S/O GANGAYYA
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER OF NEKSRTC,
R/O. MASKI, TQ. LINGASUGUR,
DIST. RAICHUR-584122.
2. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER
Digitally signed
NWKSRTC BUS, GADAG DEPOT,
by KHAJAAMEEN GADAG-582103.
L MALAGHAN
...RESPONDENTS
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA (BY SRI SUDHIRSINGH R. VIJAPUR, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED: 12.12.2018)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF M.V
ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS AND MODIFY THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 24.11.2016
PASSED BY THE I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS
JUDGE AT RAICHUR IN MVC.NO.259/2014.
THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
JUDGMENT ON 24.06.2024, COMING ON FOR
'PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT' THIS DAY, THE COURT
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4554
MFA No. 202146 of 2018
JUDGMENT
This appeal is by the claimant in MVC.No.259/2014 on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Judge, at Raichur, (hereinafter for short referred to as 'Tribunal') against judgment and award passed in the said case dated 24.11.2016, claiming for enhancement of compensation.
02. The parties will be referred to as per their ranks before the Tribunal for sake of convenience.
03. The brief facts of the case are that on 19.01.2014 at about 07.00 a.m. the claimant met with accident near Basaweshwar Circle, at Raichur, due to rash and negligent driving of Bus belonging to the corporation (respondent No.2) bearing Reg.No.KA-26-F-816 by its driver. As a result of which, the claimant sustained grievous injuries. He was admitted in the Hospital for about 15 days and had spent Rs.2,00,000/- towards medical expenses.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4554 MFA No. 202146 of 2018
04. It is further case of the claimant that he was aged about 22 years at the time of accident. He was doing mason work and earning Rs.10,000/- per month. Due to injuries sustained in the accident, he has been suffering from permanent disability. Hence, prayed to award the compensation.
05. The respondent No.2 in the written statement denied the contentions of the claim petition. It has further stated that the accident had taken place due to negligence of the claimant and prayed for dismissal of the case.
06. From the rival contentions of both the parties, the Tribunal had framed the necessary issues for its determination.
07. The claimant to prove his case had examined PW.1 and PW.2 got marked Ex.P.1 to 9. The respondent No.2 - corporation examined its official as RW.1, but no documents were marked.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4554 MFA No. 202146 of 2018
08. The Tribunal after hearing both the parties and appreciating the evidence available on record awarded the following amount of compensation:-
Sl. Heads of Compensation Amount
No. (in Rs.)
01. Pain and suffering 30,000/-
02. Medical Expenses 1,19,845/-
03. Attendant charges 10,000/-
04. Conveyance and other Misc. 10,000/-
Expenses
Total 1,69,845/-
09. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the claimant and the respondent No.2 - corporation.
10. The learned counsel for the claimant submits that the Tribunal has not awarded the compensation under the head of loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability. The claimant has examined PW.2, who had issued the disability certificate. The Tribunal in -5- NC: 2024:KHC-K:4554 MFA No. 202146 of 2018 the impugned judgment observed that the claimant did not examine the author of the disability certificate. Therefore, no amount of compensation is awarded under the said head. The said fact is incorrect. The Tribunal has not considered the evidence of PW.2. Hence, just and reasonable compensation was not awarded. The amount of compensation awarded under other heads are also on lower side. The Tribunal has taken the income of the claimant is on lower side. Therefore, prayed to enhance the amount of compensation.
11. The learned counsel for the corporation supported the impugned judgment and prayed to dismiss the appeal.
12. The following question arises for my consideration:-
"Whether the claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation.?" -6-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4554 MFA No. 202146 of 2018
13. The fact of accident and the injuries sustained by the claimant due to the vehicle accident are not seriously disputed in this appeal. The corporation did not file any appeal against the impugned judgment. Hence, there is no need to interference in the said findings.
14. The claimant has sustained the following injuries as per Ex.P.6.
a. Multiple abrasions over the occipital region. b. Multiple CLW over occipital region.
c. Tear of the left ear pinna
d. Fracture upper one third of left femur with
displaced fracture ends.
15. The medical records reveal that the claimant was admitted in the hospital as inpatient. The receipts produced by the claimant were considered by the Tribunal and awarded an amount of Rs.1,19,845/ - towards medical expenses. It is based on records, therefore, no need for interference.
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4554 MFA No. 202146 of 2018
16. The claimant examined author of Ex.P.6 as PW.2. In his evidence he has stated about the disability / difficulties of the claimant and assessed the disability. According to his evidence, the claimant has been suffering from permanent disability to the extent of 35% to the whole body. The said disability assessed by PW.2 is on much higher side. Therefore, considering the nature of work the claimant has to do and the injuries sustained by him, the permanent disability is taken as 15% to the whole body.
17. The claimant was aged about 22 years as per the claim petition and the medical records. Therefore, the age of the claimant is taken as 22 years. The suitable multiplier applicable is 15.
18. The claimant has contended that he was mason and earning Rs.10,000/- per month. There is no reliable evidence to accept the same. The Tribunal did not awarded the compensation under the head of loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability, on the ground that the claimant had not examined the doctor who -8- NC: 2024:KHC-K:4554 MFA No. 202146 of 2018 issued Ex.P.2, which is erroneous. Therefore, it has not assessed the income of the claimant. The notional income of the claimant would be assessed as per the schedule prepared by the Karnataka Legal Services Authority. According to the same, the income of the claimant is taken as Rs.7,500/- per month. On the basis of the above said figures, loss of future earning capacity due to permanent disability is calculated.
19. The Tribunal has not awarded the compensation under the head of loss of income during the laid up period. Due to the injuries sustained by him, at least for a period of 03 months, he might not be in a position to work and lost his income. The Tribunal has also not awarded the compensation towards loss of amenities. Looking to the infirmities and disabilities as stated by PW.2 in Ex.P.6, the claimant is entitled for some amount of compensation towards loss of amenities and future unhappiness. The amount of compensation awarded under the other heads except the medical expenses, are also on lower side, which needs to be enhanced. Accordingly, the following amount of compensation is awarded.
-9- NC: 2024:KHC-K:4554 MFA No. 202146 of 2018 Sl. Heads of Compensation Amount No. (in Rs.) 01. Pain and suffering 50,000/- 02. Medical expenses 1,19,845/- 03. Special diet, attendant charges, 30,000/- conveyance and Misc. expenses 04. Loss of future earning capacity 2,43,000/- due to permanent disability. (Rs.7,500 x 12 x 18 x15%) 05. Loss of amenities 40,000/- Total 4,82,845/-
20. The claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation of Rs.3,13,000/-. The claimant is also entitled for interest at the rate of 6% on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of claim petition till the date of its realization excluding the delayed period of 588 days in filing the appeal.
21. For the above said discussion, I answered the above said question partly in the affirmative and pass the following;-
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4554 MFA No. 202146 of 2018 ORDER I. The appeal is allowed in part.
II. The impugned judgment and award passed by the I Additional District Judge and MACT, Raichur, in MVC.No.259/2014 dated 24.11.2016 is modified; A) The claimant is entitled for enhancement of Rs.3,13,000/- with the interest at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of petition till its realization excluding the delayed period of 588 days in filing the appeal. B) The respondent No.2 shall deposit the enhanced the compensation with the interest within a period of 08 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. C) The orders of the Tribunal pertaining to the deposit and release are not disturbed.
The registry is directed to send back the Trial Court records along with copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
JUDGE KJJ List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43 CT:PK