Karnataka High Court
Sri M Chinnappa vs Smt. Kanthi Rao on 9 December, 2021
Bench: H T Prasad
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.2675 OF 2016 (MV)
BETWEEN:
SRI M CHINNAPPA
S/O MASTI NAYAK,
AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
OCC:FOREST CONTRACTOR,
NO.178, 3RD CROSS,
K K NAGAR,NANDINI LAYOUT,
BANGALORE-560 096
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GURUDEV PRASAD K. T., ADV.)
AND
1. SMT. KANTHI RAO
MAJOR, W/O SUMAN RAO,
III FLOOR,SDCA BUILDING,
OPP:SAHYADRI COLLEGE,
VIDYANAGAR, SHIMOGA
2. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE
COMPANY LIMITED
NO.9/2,MAHALAKSHMI COMPLEX,
II FLOOR,OPP:AJANTHA HOTEL,
2
M.G ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001
BY ITS MANAGER
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. V. R. DATAR, ADV. FOR R2;
R1 SERVED-UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
10.9.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.3227/2014 ON THE
FILE OF THE 9TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE,
34TH ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER,
MACT-7, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, 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 10.9.2015 passed
by the IX Addl. Small Causes and Addl. Motor Accident
Claims Tribunal, Bangalore in MVC 3227/2014.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal
briefly stated are that on 12.6.2014, the claimant was
proceeding by walk on the road side in front of Ashoka
Hotel, near KSRTC bus stand, Shimoga, at that time,
car bearing registration No.KA-14-N-4266 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 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 respondents
appeared through counsel and filed written statement
in which the averments made in the petition were
denied.
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, Mr.Sugitharaj was examined as
PW-2 and Dr.B.Ramesh was examined as PW-3 and
got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P22. On
behalf of the respondents, two witnesses were
examined as RWs-1 and 2 and got exhibited
documents namely Ex.R1 to Ex.R8. 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.203,045/- along with interest
at the rate of 6% 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
raised the following contentions:
Firstly, even though the claimant claims that he
was working as Forest Contractor and earning
Rs.10,000/- per month, but the Tribunal has taken the
notional income as merely as Rs.6,000/- per month.
Secondly, PW-3, the doctor has stated in his
evidence that the claimant has suffered disability of
24% to lower limb and 12% to whole body. But the
Tribunal has erred in taking the whole body disability
at only 8%.
Thirdly, due to the accident, the claimant has
sustained grievous injuries. He was treated as
inpatient for a period of 7 days. Even after discharge
from the hospital, he was not in a position to
discharge his regular work. He 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 raised following counter
contentions:
Firstly, even though the claimant claims that he
was earning Rs.10,000/- per month, he has not
produced any documents to establish his income.
Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the
income of the claimant notionally.
Secondly, PW-3, the doctor has stated in his
evidence that the claimant has suffered disability of
24% to lower limb and 12% to whole body. The
Tribunal considering the injuries sustained by the
claimant, has rightly assessed the whole body
disability at 8%.
Thirdly, 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.
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.
The claimant claims that he was earning
Rs.10,000/- per month. But he has not produced any
documents to prove his income. In the absence of
proof of income, the notional income has to be
assessed. As per the guidelines issued by the
Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, for the
accident taken place in the year 2014, the notional
income has to be taken at Rs.8,500/- p.m.
As per wound certificate, the claimant has
sustained trimalleolar fracture of right ankle. PW-3,
the doctor has stated in his evidence that the claimant
has suffered disability of 24% to lower limb and
12% to whole body. Therefore, taking into
consideration the deposition of the doctor, PW-2 and
injuries mentioned in the wound certificate, the
Tribunal has rightly assessed the whole body disability
at 8%. The claimant is aged about 59 years at the
time of the accident and multiplier applicable to his
age group is '9'. Thus, the claimant is entitled for
compensation of Rs.73,440/- (Rs.8,500*12*9*8%) on
account of 'loss of future income'.
The nature of injuries suggests that the claimant
must have been under rest and treatment for a period
of 3 months. Therefore, the claimant is entitled for
compensation of Rs.25,500/- (Rs.8,500*3 months)
under the head 'loss of income during laid up period'.
The claimant was treated as inpatient for more
than 6 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.11,000/- to Rs.20,000/-.
Due to the accident, the claimant has suffered
grievous injuries and also undergone surgery. He has
suffered lot of pain during treatment and he has to
suffer with the disability stated by the doctor
throughout his life. Considering the same, I am
inclined to enhance the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal under the head of 'loss of amenities' from
Rs.10,000/- to Rs.40,000/- and under the head of
'pain and sufferings' from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.45,000/-.
Considering the nature of injuries, the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other
heads is just and reasonable.
10. Thus, the claimant is entitled to the
following compensation:
As awarded As awarded
Compensation under by the by this Court
different Heads Tribunal (Rs.)
(Rs.)
Pain and sufferings 25,000 45,000
Medical expenses 77,205 77,205
Food, nourishment, 11,000 20,000
conveyance and attendant
charges
Loss of income during laid 18,000 24,000
up period
Loss of amenities 10,000 40,000
Loss of future income 51,840 73,440
Future medical expenses 10,000 10,000
Total 203,045 289,645
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.289,645/-.
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the compensation amount along with interest @ 6%
p.a. 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 excluding
interest for the compensation awarded under the head
of 'future medical expenses'.
The Tribunal is directed to release the enhanced
compensation amount in favour of the claimant after
due verification.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DM
