Karnataka High Court
Prakash S/O Sharanappa @ Gangapa ... vs Hanamantray S/O Gollalappa Karagond ... on 15 July, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4914
MFA No. 200759 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 15TH DAY OF JULY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200759 OF 2022 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI PRAKASH
S/O SHARANAPPA @ GANGAPA BADIGER
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O. MALLI NOW AT SHIKARKHANE CROSS,
STATION ROAD, VIJAYAPURA.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI S. S. MAMADAPUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI HANAMANTRAY S/O GOLLALAPPA KARAGOND
Digitally signed by AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
KHAJAAMEEN L R/O. SASABAL, TQ. SINDAGI-586128.
MALAGHAN
Location: HIGH
COURT OF 2. THE MANAGER LEGAL
KARNATAKA
HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
#25/1, 2ND FLOOR, BUILDING NO.2,
SHANKARNARAYAN BUILDING,
M.G. ROAD, BENGALURU-560001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. PREETI PATIL MELKUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
VIDE ORDER DATED 14.12.2022 NOTICE TO R1 IS
DISPENSED WITH)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4914
MFA No. 200759 of 2022
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO
ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT PAYABLE TO HIM BY
SUITABLY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
23.07.2021 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE IV ADDITIONAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT-XV, VIJAYPUR, IN MVC NO. 846/2017.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA) This is a claimant's appeal in M.V.C.No.846 of 2017 on the file of the IV Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT-XV, Vijayapura (hereinafter for short referred to as 'Tribunal') against judgment and award passed in the said case dated 23.07.2021, claiming for enhancement of compensation.
2. The matter is posted for admission and with consent of both side advocates', case is taken up for final disposal.
3. The parties will be referred to as per their ranks before the Tribunal for sake of convenience. -3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4914 MFA No. 200759 of 2022
4. It is the case of the petitioner that on 10.12.2016 around 12.55 p.m., petitioner along with one Iranna Sanganna Pattar were going on a motor cycle bearing Registration No.KA-32-EG-5187. The said Iranna Sanganna Pattar was riding the said motor cycle. He met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of the Cab bearing Registration No.KA-24-2124 by its driver. As a result of which, the petitioner had sustained grievous injuries.
5. He has further contended that petitioner was aged about 45 years, he was a Coolie and earning Rs.15,000/- per month. Due to the injuries, he has been suffering from permanent disability. With these reasons, he has prayed to award the compensation of Rs.21,50,000/-.
6. The Respondent No.2 - Insurer disputed the contents of the claim petition and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4914 MFA No. 200759 of 2022
7. From the rival contentions of both the parties, the Tribunal had framed the necessary issues for its determination.
8. This matter was clubbed along with M.V.C.No.845 of 2017 and common evidence was recorded. Petitioners have examined PWs-1 to 4 and got marked Exs.P1 to 29 and closed their evidence. The respondents have not lead any evidence but got marked Ex.R1.
9. After hearing both the parties and appreciating the evidence available on record, the Tribunal disposed of the case by the impugned judgment and award dated 23.07.2021.
10. The Tribunal assessed the income of the claimant as Rs.8,750/- per month, assessed disability at 10%, applied multiplier as '14' and assessed the compensation towards loss of dependency and in all, the -5- NC: 2024:KHC-K:4914 MFA No. 200759 of 2022 Tribunal has awarded the following amount of compensation:
Sl. Heads of Compensation Amount No. (in Rs.) 1 Injury, pain and suffering 30,000 2 Loss of earning capacity on 1,47,000 account of permanent physical disability 3 Medical expenses 1,10,353 4 Food, nourishment, special 5,000 diet and incidental charges 5 Attendant and conveyance 16,500 6 Loss of amenities 10,000 7 Loss of income during laid 26,250 up period Total 3,45,103 Rounded off to 3,45,100
11. The appellant has challenged the same on the ground of inadequacy of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
12. Heard the learned counsel for the claimant and learned counsel for Respondent No.2 - Insurance Company.
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4914 MFA No. 200759 of 2022
13. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal had not considered disability properly. According to PW-3, petitioner has been suffering from permanent disability to an extent of 30 to 34%. Further, the Tribunal had considered it as 10%. No amount of compensation is awarded towards future medical expenses though PW-3 has stated that petitioner requires another surgery to remove the implants and the amount of compensation under the other heads are also meager. Therefore, he prayed for enhancement of compensation.
14. Learned counsel for Respondent No.2 supported the impugned judgment and submitted that there is no reason to interfere with the same.
15. The Tribunal has considered the evidence of PW-3 and rightly held that the petitioner has been suffering from permanent disability to an extent of 10%. It does not call for any interference. However, the amount of compensation awarded under the heads pain and suffering, incidental expenses and attendant charges, loss -7- NC: 2024:KHC-K:4914 MFA No. 200759 of 2022 of amenities needs reconsideration. As rightly submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant, the length of right leg is reduced by 10 centimeters. It may cause difficulty for the claimant to walk or he may limp while walking as per the contention of the Advocate for the claimant. Considering the said contention, some more amount needs to be awarded towards loss of amenities.
16. Claimant was admitted as an inpatient for 46 days and he has taken follow-up treatment. Looking to the injuries, it appears he might have taken service of Taxi or Ambulance to attend the hospital. Therefore, the amount of compensation towards special diet, nourishment and incidental charges awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate. Someone might have attended him in the hospital when he was admitted in the hospital and even after discharge from the hospital, someone must have attended him, since he sustained fracture of condylar right femur. Considering all these factors, amount of compensation has to be -8- NC: 2024:KHC-K:4914 MFA No. 200759 of 2022 enhanced under the above heads, Accordingly following amount of compensation awarded.
Sl. Heads of Compensation Amount
No. (in Rs.)
1 Pain and suffering 40,000
2 Loss of future earning 1,47,000
capacity due to permanent
disability
3 Medical expenses 1,10,353
4 Food, special diet and 25,000
incidental charges
5 Attendant and conveyance 25,000
charges
6 Loss of amenities 40,000
7 Loss of income during laid 35,000
up period
8 Future medical expenses 20,000
Total 4,42,353
Less 3,45,103
Enhanced amount 97,250
The claimant is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.97,250/- (Rupees Ninety Seven Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty only) with 6% interest from the date of petition till its realization.
17. For the aforesaid discussion, I pass the following:
-9-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4914 MFA No. 200759 of 2022 ORDER i. The appeal is allowed in part.
ii. The impugned judgment and award passed by the IV Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT-
XV, Vijayapura, in M.V.C.No.846 of 2017 dated 23.07.2021 is modified.
iii. The claimant is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.97,250/- (Rupees Ninety Seven Thousand Two Hundred and Fifty only) with 6% interest per annum in addition to the amount awarded by the Tribunal.
iv. The Respondent No.2-Insurance Company shall deposit the said amount with interest within a period of Six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
The accident had taken place during the year 2017 and the enhanced amount is not much. Therefore, entire amount with accrued interest is
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4914 MFA No. 200759 of 2022 ordered to be released in favour of the claimant on due identification.
The registry is directed to send back the Trial Court records with copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
JUDGE DH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29