Karnataka High Court
Sri.Shafiulla vs The United India Insurance Co Ltd on 4 December, 2021
Bench: H T Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MFA No.995 OF 2021(MV)
BETWEEN:
SRI. SHAFIULLA
S/O MODINSAB @ MOHINDDINSAB
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS
R/O PATTANAYANAKANAHALLI
SIRA TALUK - 572 130
TUMAKURU DISTRICT ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. V. B. SIDDARAMAIAH, ADV.)
AND:
1. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.
1ST FLOOR, RAJA COMPLEX
AMBEDKAR ROAD, SIRA TOWN - 572 130
TUMAKURU DISTRICT
REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER
2. SRI. PAVAN KUMAR
S/O S. K. MOHANRAJ
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
R/O NO.179, TRANQUIL CITY
OPP. NARAYANA HRUDALAYA
FESTO BACK SIDE
BOMMASANDRA
BENGALURU - 560 050 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. MOHAN KUMAR J. ADV. FOR R1;
2
VIDE ORDER DATED 17.8.2021
NOTICE TO R2 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT, AGINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
06.07.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.1204/2016 ON THE FILE
OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT,
SIRA PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act',
for short) has been filed by the claimant being
aggrieved by the judgment dated 06.07.2019 passed
by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sira in MVC
No.1204/2016.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal
briefly stated are that on 11.07.2016 at about 06.00
P.M. the claimant was proceeding by walk towards
hotel to have tea, after completion of his work at
Pattanayakanahalli Police Station at Sira-P.N. Road, a
Car bearing registration No.KA-01-MF-9926 came in
rash and negligent manner hit the claimant /
pedestrian. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the
claimant sustained grievous injuries and was
hospitalized.
3. The claimant filed a petition under Section
166 of the Act seeking compensation. It was pleaded
that he spent huge amount towards medical
expenses, conveyance, etc. It was further pleaded
that the accident occurred purely on account of the
rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by
its driver.
4. On service of notice, the respondent Nos.1
and 2 being the owner and insurer of the offending
vehicle have appeared through counsel and filed
separate written statement in which the averments
made in the petition were denied. It was pleaded by
the owner that the petition itself is false and frivolous
in the eye of law. It was further pleaded that the
driver of the offending vehicle having a valid driving
licence as on the date of the accident. Hence, he
sought for dismissal of the petition.
It was pleaded by the Insurance Company that
the accident was due to negligence on the part of the
claimant himself. The driver of the offending vehicle
did not have valid driving licence as on the date of the
accident. The liability is subject to terms and
conditions of the policy. The age, avocation and
income of the claimant and the medical expenses are
denied. It was further pleaded that the quantum of
compensation claimed by the claimant is exorbitant.
Hence, he sought for dismissal of the petition.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties,
the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter
recorded the evidence. The claimant himself was
examined as PW-1 and got exhibited documents
namely Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.8. On behalf of the
respondents, two witnesses were examined as RW-1
and RW-2 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.R.1
to Ex.R.8. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned
judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took place
on account of rash and negligent driving of the
offending vehicle by its driver, as a result of which,
the claimant sustained injuries. The Tribunal further
held that the claimant is entitled to a compensation of
Rs.50,000/- along with interest at the rate of 7% p.a.
and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the
compensation amount along with interest. Being
aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimant has
contended that due to the accident, the claimant has
suffered grievous injuries. He has spent Rs.1,50,000/-
for medical expenses. The global compensation of
Rs.50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is on lower side.
Hence, he sought for enhancement of compensation.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for
the Insurance Company has contended that the
injuries suffered by the claimant are minor in nature.
Even the claimant claims that he was spent
Rs.1,50,000/- towards medical expenses, he has not
produced any documents to established the same.
Therefore, the global compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is just and reasonable and it does not call for
any interference. Hence, he sought for dismissal of
the appeal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties
and perused the judgment and award.
9. It is not in dispute that the claimant has
sustained injuries in the road traffic accident occurred
due to rash and negligent driving of the offending
vehicle by its driver.
Even thought the claimant claims that he was
spent Rs.1,50,000/- towards Medical Expenses, he has
not produced any documents to established the same.
Considering the evidence of the parties, injuries
suffered by the claimant, age and avocation of the
claimant, the claimant is entitled for Rs.25,000/- in
addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
10. In the result, the appeal is allowed in
part. The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
The claimant is entitled to a total compensation
of Rs.75,000/-.
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the compensation amount along with interest at 7%
per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition
till the date of realization, within a period of six weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.
This Court vide order dated 19.11.2021 while
condoning the delay, has denied the interest for a
period of 473 days. Hence, the claimant is not entitled
for the interest for the delayed period in filing the
appeal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HA/-
