Sri Sarvanan vs Mr Rajesh R
2021 Latest Caselaw 404 Kant

                        1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021

                     BEFORE

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

            MFA No.5360 OF 2013(MV)

BETWEEN:

SRI. SARVANAN
S/O PONNASWAMY
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
# 406, 4TH MAIN
HARO HALLI, BOMMANAHALLI(P)
BENGALURU-68.
                                    ... APPELLANT

(BY SRI. N.M.PRUTHVI RAJ, ADV. )

AND

1.    MR. RAJESH R.,
      S/O RAMOJI RAO
      AGED MAJOR
      ANJANEYA LAYOUT
      ADEPET,
      NELAMANGALA TOWN-562123.

2.    THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
      D O 7, PEENYA,
      #20, FIRST FLOOR
      100 FEET ROAD
      JALAHALLI CROSS
                            2



      BANGALORE-21.
                                      ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. Y.K.SHESHAGIRI RAO, ADV. FOR R2:
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH
V/O DTED:07.03.2014)

    THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF
MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED: 25.03.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.865/2008,
ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE
JUDGE, AND XVII ACMM, MACT, BANGALORE, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCMENT 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 25.03.2013 passed

by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.

2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal

briefly stated are that on 05.12.2007 at 5.30 p.m.,

the claimant was proceeding on his motorcycle

bearing Reg.No.KA-51/E-8542, when he returned to

house from his work place, near Koodlu Junction,

Hosur road, at that time, tempo bearing Reg.No.KA-

54-75 being driven by its driver at a high speed and in

a rash and negligent manner, dashed against 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 on the ground that he was working in a

Emeerson Network Co., Koramangala Bangalore and

was earning Rs.12,000/- per month. It was pleaded

that he also 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 its counsel and filed written

statement in which the averments made in the

petition were denied. It was further pleaded that the

accident was due to rash and negligent riding of the

vehicle by the claimant himself and accident was not

due to any rash and negligent driving of the offending

vehicle. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the

petition.

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 examined eyewitness as PW-2

and got exhibited 10 documents namely Ex.P1 to

Ex.P10. On behalf of the respondents, Senior

Assistant was examined as RW-1 and got exhibited 2

documents namely Ex.R1 to Ex.R2. 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.5,000/- 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, due to the accident the claimant has

suffered three injuries and he was inpatient for a

period of 3 days and he has suffered lot of pain during

the treatment. The global compensation of Rs.5,000/-

awarded by the Tribunal is 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 the following

contentions.

Firstly, the injuries suffered by the claimant are

minor in nature. The overall compensation awarded

by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. Hence, he

sought dismissal of the appeal.

8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties

and perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal

and original records.

9. It is not in dispute that the claimant has

suffered injuries in a road traffic accident occurred on

05.12.2007, due to rash and negligent driving of the

offending vehicle by its driver. Due to the accident

the claimant has suffered the following injuries.

1. Sutured lacerated over the frontal regions 1.5 cm,

2. Head injury left acute temporal region 1.5 cm and

3. Multiple abrasions over right shoulder and both knees.

Taking into consideration the evidence of the

parties and considering Ex.P8, discharge summary, I

am of the opinion that, the global compensation of

Rs.25,000/- is awarded with 6% interest to the

claimant.

The Insurance Company is directed to deposit

the compensation amount along with interest at 6%

p.a. from the date of petition till the date of payment

within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt

of copy of this judgment.

To the aforesaid extent, the judgment of the

Claims Tribunal is modified.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part.

Sd/-

Mkm                              JUDGE