Smt. Usha H vs Reliance General Insurance ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 5812 Kant

                        1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

                     BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD

            MFA No.2195 OF 2020 (MV)

BETWEEN:

SMT. USHA H
S/O H.J.NARASIMHAMURTHY
AGED 42 YEARS,
R/O SREE GANGA,
NEAR SRS COLLEGE,
BESIDE RING ROAD-572 104
BADDIHALLI EXTENSION,
TUMAKURU.                            ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI. V. B. SIDDARAMAIAH, ADV.)

AND

1.    RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
      DAVANAGERE ROAD,
      MAGANUR COMMERCIAL COMPLEX,
      B.D.ROAD, CHITRADURGA-577 501
      REP BY ITS MANAGER

2.    SRI.SYED ASGAR,
      S/O LATE SYED AFZAL
      AGED 40 YEARS,
      R/O NRUPATUNGA EXTENSION,
                            2



     HIRIYUR TOWN-572 142
     CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.
                                       ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. LINGARAJ H. S., ADV. FOR R1;
    VIDE ORDER DATED 12.03.2020
    DISPENSED WITH)


     THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF
MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
18.09.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.964/2018 ON THE
FILE OF THE IST ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AND JMFC, ADDITIONAL M.A.C.T., IV, CHITRADURGA,
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 18.9.2019 passed

by the I Addl. Senior Civil Judge & Addl. Motor

Accident Claims Tribunal-IV, Chitradurga in MVC

964/2018.

2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal

briefly stated are that on 28.3.2018, the claimant

after finishing her work was riding a scooty motorcycle

bearing registration No.KA-06-Y-6882 heading

towards Honenahalli, in front of Sneha Food Factory,

Gorladku Gate, Hiriyur Taluk on NH-4 service road, at

that time, goods vehicle bearing registration No.KA-

16-C-4393 being driven by its driver at a high speed

and in a rash and negligent manner, dashed to the

vehicle of the claimant. 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 she 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 No.2

appeared through counsel and filed written statement

in which the averments made in the petition were

denied. The respondent No.1 did not appear before

the Tribunal inspite of service of notice and was placed

ex-parte.

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 Dr.N.Venkateshiva Reddy was

examined as PW-2 and got exhibited documents

namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P16. On behalf of the

respondents, no witness was examined and got

exhibited documents namely Ex.R1. 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.3,60,835/- 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 the claimant has sustained grievous

injuries. She has examined the doctor as PW-2. Due

to the disability stated by the doctor, the claimant has

suffered loss of income. She was treated as inpatient

for a period of 5 days. Even after discharge from the

hospital, she was not in a position to discharge her

regular work. She has suffered lot of pain during

treatment. Considering the same, the compensation

granted by the Tribunal under the heads of 'loss of

amenities', 'pain and sufferings' and other heads are

on the lower side. Hence, he sought for allowing the

appeal.

7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for

the Insurance Company has contended that even

though the doctor has assessed the disability, the

claimant has continued her service and there is no

loss of income. Considering the oral and documentary

evidence and considering the age and avocation of the

claimant, the Tribunal has granted just and reasonable

compensation and it does not call for interference.

However, the interest awarded by the Tribunal at 7%

p.a. on the compensation amount is on the higher

side. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.

8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties

and perused the records.

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.

As per wound certificate, the claimant has

sustained compound fracture of tibia and other

injuries. The claimant was working as a Teacher in

Govt. High School and she was a Government

Employee. After recovering from injuries, she has

continued her job. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly

not granted any compensation under the head 'loss of

future income'.

The claimant was treated as inpatient for more

than 5 days in the hospital and thereafter, has

received further treatment. Hence, I am inclined to

enhance the compensation awarded under the head of

'conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges'

from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.30,000/-.

Due to the accident, the claimant has suffered

grievous injuries and also undergone surgery. She has

suffered lot of pain during treatment and she has to

suffer with the disability stated by the doctor

throughout her life. Considering the same, I am

inclined to enhance the compensation awarded by the

Tribunal under the head of 'loss of amenities' from

Rs.50,000/- to Rs.70,000/- and under the head of

'pain and sufferings' from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.70,000/-.

Considering the nature of injuries, the

compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other

heads is just and reasonable.

11. 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.4,10,835/- as against Rs.3,60,835/- awarded by

the Tribunal.

The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the

compensation amount along with interest 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.

The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6%

p.a.

The Tribunal is directed to release the enhanced

compensation amount in favour of the claimant after

due verification.

In view of disposal of appeal, I.A.2/2021 for

posting does not survive for consideration and

accordingly, it is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE DM