Karnataka High Court

Hanumantha G Bandivaddar vs B Sathish on 20 December, 2021

Bench: H T Prasad

                          1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021

                        BEFORE

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

              MFA No.1915 OF 2016(MV)

BETWEEN:

HANUMANTHA G BANDIVADDAR
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
S/O SRI GURAPPA
RESIDING NEAR K.M.E.S. SCHOOL
JAYANTHINAGARA
KUKKUNDOOR VILLAGE
KARKAL TALUK - 575 201.

                                         ...APPELLANT
(BY KUM. NAZEEFA M. MULLA, ADV. FOR
SRI.PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY H)

AND

1.     B SATHISH
       AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
       S/O B PONNURAJ
       R/AT SHRI VENKATARAMANA DEVIKRIPA
       C/O GOVINDA PAI
       NEAR CASHEW FACTORY
       URVA MARKET, ASHOK NAGARA
       BOLUR VILLAGE
       MANGALORE TALUK - 575 201.

2.     THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
       NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD.,
                            2



     UDUPI DIVISIONAL OFFICE
     UDUPI - 576 101.
                                        ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI.K.S. LAKSHMINARASAPPA, ADV. FOR
SRI.A M VENKATESH, ADV. FOR R2:
    NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W V/O DATED: 20.12.2021)

     THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:31.03.2015 PASSED
IN MVC NO.924/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND AMACT, KARKALA,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 31.03.2015 passed

by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Karkala in MVC

No.924/2014.

2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal

briefly stated are that on 18.08.2014 at 08.30 P.M.,

the claimant was walking by the side of Pulkeri-

Banglegudde Bypass road and when he reached near

K.M.E.S. High School, Jayanthi Nagar, Kukkundoor

Village, a TVS Star City two wheeler bearing

registration No.KA-19-Y-2190 came from Jodurasthe

side in a rash and negligent manner and dashed

against 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 riding of the offending vehicle by

its rider.

4. On service of notice, the respondent Nos.1

and 2 appeared through counsel and filed separate

written statement. It was pleaded by the owner that

the petition itself is false and frivolous in the eye of

law and denied all the averments made in the claim

petition. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the

petition.

It was pleaded by the insurer that that the

petition itself is false and frivolous in the eye of law

and denied all the averments made in the claim

petition. It was further pleaded that 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 Dr.K.S.Rao was examined as

PW-2 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P.1 to

Ex.P.31 and Ex.C.1 to Ex.C.3. On behalf of the

respondents, no witness was examined and got

exhibited a document namely Ex.R.1-Insurance Policy.

The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter

alia, held that the accident took place on account of

rash and negligent riding of the offending vehicle by

its rider, as a result of which, the claimant sustained

injuries. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is

entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,40,600/- along with

interest at the rate of 8% 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 was inpatient in the

hospital for a period of 10 days. He has suffered lot of

pain during the treatment. Even after discharge from

the hospital, he was not in a position to discharge his

regular work. He has examined the doctor as PW-2,

who has stated in his evidence that the claimant has

suffered permanent disability of 15% to left lower

limb. He has to suffered this disability and

unhappiness through out of his life. 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 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 though the doctor assessed the permanent

disability of 15% to left lower limb and since he has

continued in his service as a Teacher, there is no loss

of income due to the disability. He further contended

that the claimant has not produced any document to

show that he has not received salary during

treatment. Therefore, considering the injuries suffered

by the claimant and considering the age and avocation

of the claimant, the overall compensation awarded by

the Tribunal is just and reasonable. In view of

judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the

case of MS.JOYEETA BOSE AND OTHERS vs.

VENKATESHAN.V AND OTHERS (MFA 5896/2018

and connected matters disposed of on

24.8.2020), the claimants are entitled for 6%

interest but the Tribunal has granted 8% interest

which is on the higher side. 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 riding of the offending

vehicle by its rider.

As per wound certificate, the claimant has

sustained wasting of (L) thigh and calf muscles by 3

cms., shortening of (L) leg by 2 cms., movements of

(L) knee are painful at terminal decrees and limping

Gait in (L) lower limb. PW-2, the doctor has stated in

his evidence that the claimant has suffered permanent

disability of 15% to left lower limb. Since the claimant

is a Teacher, even after recovering from the injuries,

he has continued in his service. Since there is no loss

of income due to disability, the Tribunal has rightly

not granted any compensation under the head of 'loss

of income due to disability'.

Due to the accident, the claimant has suffered

grievous injuries and also undergone surgery. He was

inpatient in the hospital for a period of

10 days. He has suffered lot of pain during the

treatment and he has to suffer with the disability

stated by the doctor throughout his life. Considering

the evidence of the claimant and the injuries suffered

by him, 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/-, 'pain and

suffering' from Rs.25,000/- to Rs.50,000/- and 'rest,

nourishment and attendant charges' from Rs.5,000/-

to Rs.15,000/-.

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 different Heads Tribunal Court (Rs.) (Rs.) Pain and sufferings 25,000 50,000 Medical expenses 75,600 75,600 Food, nourishment, 10,000 15,000 conveyance and attendant charges Loss of amenities 10,000 40,000 Future medical expenses 20,000 20,000 Total 1,40,600 2,00,600

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.2,00,600/-.

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

compensation shall carry 6% interest per annum.

This Court vide order dated 08.04.2019 has

denied the interest for a period of 327 days. Hence,