Karnataka High Court
B. Narasimhulu vs Pompapathy on 7 January, 2021
Author: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7 T H DAY OF JANUARY, 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.S. SANJAY GOWDA
MFA No.20523/2013 (MV) C/w. MFA No.20072/2013
In MFA No.20523/2013:
Between:
B. Narasimhulu,
S/o. late Narasimhappa,
Aged about 26 years, Agricultural coolie,
R/o.: Madenahalli village,
Rayadurga Taluk, Ananthapur District,
Now R/o.: Guggarahatti Village,
Ballari Taluk, Ballari District.
..... Appellant
(By Shri Y.Lakshmikant Reddy, Advocate)
And:
1. Pompapathy S/o. Jogam Chitraiah,
Major, Owner of the auto
Bearing Reg. No.KA-34/A-4795,
R/o.: Near Varabasappa Temple,
Kurugodu Post, Ballari Tq. & Dist.
2. The Branch Manager,
Cholamadalam MS General Ins. Co. ltd.,
Ballari.
..... Respondents
(by Shri S.K. Kayakamath, Advocate for R2;
Notice to R1 dispensed wtih)
This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of the M.V. Act
aga inst the judgm ent and award dated 20.09.2012, passed
in MVC No.19/2012 on the file of the Member, MACT-II,
B allar i, par tly allo wing the claim petit ion for compensation
and seek ing enha ncement of compensation.
:2:
In MFA No.2007 2/ 2013:
B etween:
The B ranch Manager,
M/s. Cholam andalam MS
General Ins. Co. Ltd., Ballari
Now rep. by Aut horised Signato ry,
Cholam andalam MS General Ins. Co. Ltd.,
No.135/ 5, 2 n d Floor,5 t h Cross, J.P. Nagar,
3 r d Pha se, B angalore-560078.
... Appellant
(B y Shri S.K. Kayakamath, Advoca te)
And:
1. Shri B . Narasim halu
S/o. late Naras imhapp a,
Age 26 years, Occ : Agricultural Coolie,
R/o.: Madenahalli village,
Raid urga Taluk, A nantpur Distric t,
Also at Guggarhatt i Village,
B allari Taluk, B allari Dis trict.
2. Shri A.M. Dinesh S/o. M. Madevala ppa,
Age m ajor, Driver of the Auto
bearin g reg. No.KA-34/A- 4795,
R/o. Bannadeva rahalli,
Also at Temahahalli, Monak almur t aluk,
Chitradu rga District.
3. Shri Pompathy S/o.Joam Chitray ya,
Age m ajor Owner of the auto
B earing re gn. No.KA-34/ A- 4795,
R/o.: Near Varab asappa Temple,
Kurugodu pos t,
B allari Taluk, B allari Dis trict.
... Respondents
(B y Shri Y.Lakshm ikant Reddy, Advocate for R1;
Shri B . Sharana basava, Advoca te for R3;
Respondent No.2 - served)
This MFA is filed under Section 1 73( 1) of M.V. Act,
1988 aga inst t he judgment and award dated 20.09 .2012
passed in MVC No.19/ 2012 on the file of the Mem ber, MACT-
II, B allari, awarding t he compensation of Rs.3,39,200/- with
inte rest at t he rate of 8% p.a. from the date of petition till
the date of deposit.
:3:
These appeals coming on for admission, this day, the Court
delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
Both the claimants as well as the Insurance Company are
in appeal.
2. It is not in dispute that on 10.12.2011, when the
petitioner was traveling in an Auto-Rickshaw, an accident
occurred in which the claimant suffered grievous injuries, which
prompted him to file a petition seeking for compensation.
3. The Tribunal on consideration of the evidence
adduced before it, recorded a finding that an accident did occur
on 10.12.2011 and as a result of the accident, the claimant
suffered permanent disability to his left leg and this injury to the
left leg had the effect of the claimant suffering a disability to the
extent of 30% to his whole body.
4. The Tribunal proceeded to assess the notional
income of the claimant at Rs.4,000/- per month, by considering
the percentage of disability at 30% and by applying the
multiplier of 18 proceeded to award a sum of Rs.2,59,200/-
towards loss of future income.
5. The Tribunal also awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/-
towards pain and suffering, Rs.20,000/- towards loss of
amenities, Rs.15,000/- towards medical expenses incurred,
Rs.4,500/- towards attendant charges, Rs.1,500/- towards extra
nourished food, Rs.2,000/- towards cost of conveyance and
Rs.12,000/- towards loss of income during treatment period. In
all, a sum of Rs.3,39,200/- was awarded.
6. Learned counsel for the claimant contended that the
Tribunal had erred in assessing the notional income at
Rs.4,000/- per month. He submitted that even according to the
chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority
for the purposes of determining the compensation to the motor
vehicle accident victims, for the year 2011, the notional income
has been determined at Rs.6,000/- per month and that the sum
will have to be adopted.
7. This argument of the learned counsel merits
acceptance. Since the Tribunal has correctly assessed the
disability at 30%, the notional income will have to be taken as
Rs.4,200/- (i.e., 30% of Rs.6,000/-). The award of the Tribunal
is modified by holding that the claimant would be entitled to a
sum of Rs.3,88,800/- (Rs.4,200/- x 12 x 18) towards loss of
future income as against Rs.2,59,200/- awarded by the Tribunal.
8. Since the notional income is being taken at
Rs.6,000/- per month, the compensation towards loss of income
during treatment will have to be considered at Rs.18,000/-
instead of Rs.12,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
9. The amounts awarded by the Tribunal in respect of
all other heads being just and proper and are confirmed.
10. Thus, the claimants would be entitled for the
compensation on the following heads:
Pain and suffering Rs.25,000/-
Loss of amenities Rs.20,000/-
Medical expenses Rs.15,000/-
Attendant charges Rs.4,500/-
Extra nourished food Rs.1,500/-
Conveyance Rs.2,000/-
Loss of income during laid up period Rs.18,000/-
Loss of future income Rs. 3,88,800/-
TOTAL Rs.4,74,800/-
11. Thus, the appeal in MFA No.20523/2013 is allowed in
part.
12. As far as the appeal of the Insurance Company is
concerned, the only contention advanced is that the driver of the
offending vehicle did not have a licence, which enabled him to
drive transport vehicle. In the light of the judgment rendered in
Mukund Dewangan v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., reported
in AIR 2017 SC 3668, this argument of the Insurance Company
is untenable and the same is therefore rejected. As a
consequence, the appeal in MFA No.20072/2013 filed by the
Insurance Company stands dismissed.
13. The amount in deposit, if any, before this Court is
ordered to be transmitted to the Tribunal for disbursement.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Vnp*
