Karnataka High Court
Sri Rudrappa vs New India Assurance Company ... on 8 November, 2021
Bench: P.S.Dinesh Kumar, Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
M.F.A.NO.6904/2016 (MV)
BETWEEN:
SRI. RUDRAPPA,
S/O HANUMANTHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
KODIHALLI, SHIKARIPURA TALUK,
SHIMOGA DISTRICT.
... APPELLANT
(BY SHRI RAMAKRISHNA R.M., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. NEW INDIA ASSURANCE,
COMPANY LIMITED,
R/BY IT'S MANAGER,
SHIMOGA-577201.
(POLICY NUMBER 6706 003 1110 10000
7563 DATE 8.10.2011 TO 7.10.2012)
2. MRS. PADMAVATHI SHENOY,
W/O KB SRINIVAS SHENOY,
VIJAYANAGAR 1ST MAIN ROAD,
2ND CROSS, NETAJI CIRCLE,
SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577201.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI ASHOK N. PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R1)
R2-NOTICE DISPENSED WITH V/O DT:22/09/2021)
2
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:30.03.2016
PASSED IN MVC NO.12/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MACT-13, SORABA, PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ETC.,
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
P.S. DINESH KUMAR J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the claimant in
MVC.No.12/2014 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and
Additional MACT-13, Soraba, seeking enhancement of
compensation awarded vide judgment and award dated
30.03.2016 passed by the Tribunal.
2. For the sake of convenience, parties shall be
referred as per their status before the Tribunal.
3. Heard Shri.R.M.Ramakrishna, learned advocate
for claimant-appellant and Shri.Ashok N.Patil, learned
advocate for first respondent-Insurer.
4. The claimant, Shri.Rudrappa sustained
grievous injuries in a road traffic accident on 25.02.2012,
when driver of the bus bearing Registration No.KA-
14/9410 dashed against the motorcycle, which the
claimant was riding. The claimant sustained grievous
injuries. He was shifted to Meggan Hospital, Shimoga.
Late he was treated in KMC Hospital, Manipal and Pandit
General Hospital, Sirsi. On adjudication of the claim
petition, Tribunal has awarded Rs.8,57,600/-.
5. Learned advocate for the claimant urged three
contentions:
• Firstly, the victim has suffered amputation
below knee. Therefore, the disability ought to
have considered at 100%;
• Secondly, the compensation awarded towards
amenities is on the lower side; and
• Thirdly, the notional earning capacity
considered by the Tribunal is on the lower side.
6. Shri.Ashok N.Patil, learned advocate for
Insurer submitted that as per averments made in the
claim petition, petitioner is a businessman. The Tribunal
has considered the disability at 75%, which in fact, is on
the higher side. Amputation below knee as per the
Schedule in the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, is
only 50%.
7. With regard to the notional earning capacity,
Shri. Patil fairly submitted that this Court has consistently
considered the notional earning capacity of an able bodied
person in the year 2012 as Rs.7,000/- p.m.
8. The claimant has suffered amputation below
the knee due to injuries. The liability has been admitted by
the Insurer.
9. The Tribunal has relied upon the evidence of
the doctor-P.W.2. The doctor has stated that the claimant
has suffered amputation below knee and length of
amputation stump is 15 cms. Based on this evidence, the
Tribunal has considered the disability at 75%.
10. We have carefully perused the Schedule in the
Employees Compensation Act, 1923. Where the
amputation below knee with stump exceeding 12.70 cms
(Sl.No.21) the percentage of loss of earning capacity is
50%. However, the Tribunal has considered the disability
at 75%. The Insurer has not challenged the same. Hence,
the contention urged by the appellant in this behalf is
untenable.
11. The claimant was aged 42 years as on the date
of the accident. Learned advocate for the claimant is right
in his submission that the earning capacity of the claimant
considered by the Tribunal is on the lower side. This Court
has consistently considered the notional earning capacity
at Rs.7,000/- p.m., in respect of an able bodied person in
the year 2012.
12. With regard to third contention namely the
amenities, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/-. Keeping
in view the fact that the amputation is below the knee, the
same requires some enhancement.
13. In view of the above, we re-compute the
compensation as follows:
By taking the earning capacity of Rs.7,000/-, the
loss of earning works out to Rs.8,82,000/- (Rs.7,000/-
x75%X14X12). The loss of amenities is enhanced to
Rs.50,000/-. The claimant was under treatment for a
period of four months. The compensation awarded by the
Tribunal under other heads is maintained as it is.
14. The compensation is re-computed as follows:
Sl.No. Description Amount
a. Pain and suffering Rs. 65,000/-
b. Nourishment diet extra Rs. 12,000/-
c. Attendant charges Rs. 12,000/-
d. Conveyance other incidental Rs. 15,000/-
charges and etc.,
e. Loss of amenities and comfort Rs. 50,000/-
f. Future medical expenses Rs.1,50,000/-
g. Loss of future income Rs.8,82,000/-
h. Medical bills Rs.1,64,400/-
i. Loss of income during laid up Rs.16,000/-
period
TOTAL Rs.13,66,400/-
LESS: Compensation awarded Rs.8,57,600/-
by the Tribunal
Enhanced Compensation Rs.5,08,800/-
15. Hence, the following;
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed in part by holding that
claimant is entitled for total compensation of
Rs.13,66,400/-, as against Rs.8,57,600/-
awarded by the Tribunal, payable with interest at 6%
p.a., from the date of filing claim petition till the date
of deposit. The enhanced compensation is
Rs.5,08,800/- (Rs.13,66,400/- - Rs.8,57,600/-);
and
(ii) Insurer shall pay the entire compensation
amount of Rs.13,66,400/- with interest at 6% p.a.,
excluding the amount already paid, within two weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Disbursement shall be made as directed by the
Tribunal.
No costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
PB
