S K Krishnegowda vs B H Ramachandra
2021 Latest Caselaw 5588 Kant

                             1


       IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                          BEFORE

    THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM

              M.F.A NO.2289 OF 2013 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

S.K.KRISHNEGOWDA
S/O LATE KENCHEGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
R/O SIGARANAHALLI VILLAGE,
HOLEKOTE HOBLI,
HOLENARASIPUR TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT-573201.
                                               ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.NINGAPPA.M.N, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. B.H.RAMACHANDRA
S/O HONNEGOWDA,
MAJOR,
R/O BANNAKUPPE VILLAGE,
MAVANUR POST, HOLEKOTE HOBLI,
HOLENARASIPUR TALUK,
HASSAN DISTRICT-573201.

2. THE MANAGER
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
1ST FLOOR, S.S.COMPLEX,
SUBHASH CIRCLE, HASSAN.
                                             ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.S.Y.SHIVALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE NOT ORDERED IN RESPECT OF R1)
                                  2


     THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 27.08.2010 PASSED IN MVC
NO.158/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, JMFC,
MACT, HOLENARASIPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION
FOR   COMPENSATION    AND    SEEKING  ENHANCEMENT     OF
COMPENSATION.

    THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                          JUDGMENT

The captioned appeal is filed by the claimant seeking

enhancement of compensation.

2. The appellant filed claim petition for having

sustained injuries in a road traffic accident dated 25.03.2008.

The appellant claimed that while he was walking by the side of

the road on 25.03.2008, the rider of the offending bike came

in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the

appellant herein. The appellant contends that he was an

agriculturist and in the said accident, he has suffered fracture

of base of 3rd M.T. of right foot and other injuries. Hence, filed

claim petition.

3. Though the appellant claimed that he has sustained

grievous injuries and therefore has permanent disability,

however, did not lead any medical evidence to substantiate his

claim. The Tribunal in absence of medical evidence has

awarded the medical bills under Ex.P-18 and accordingly, a

sum of Rs.5,056/- is awarded towards medical expenses.

Having regard to the injuries sustained, the Tribunal has

awarded a sum of Rs.20,000/- as global compensation.

4. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned

counsel for the respondent/Insurance Company. Perused the

records.

5. On re-appreciation of the oral and documentary

evidence, though the appellant has sustained 8 injuries,

however, the wound certificate clearly indicates that except

injury No.8, all other injuries are simple in nature. The

appellant though has suffered fracture of base of 3rd M.T. of

right foot, has failed to examine the Doctor and only disability

certificate is produced. Therefore, the Tribunal was justified in

not awarding any compensation under the head of future loss

of earnings or towards laid up period.

6. However, having regard to the fact that appellant

has suffered fracture, he is bound to face some discomfort on

account of fracture of right foot. The fact that wound

certificate clearly indicates that injury No.8 is grievous in

nature, I deem it fit to award another sum of Rs.20,000/-

globally apart from Rs.20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

7. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The

appellant is held entitled for enhanced compensation of

Rs.20,000/- globally. It is made clear that appellant is not

entitled for interest on enhanced compensation.

Sd/-

JUDGE

CA