Balappa S/O Shivamurtappa ... vs The Managing Director
2022 Latest Caselaw 1424 Kant

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   DHARWAD BENCH

      DATED THIS THE 1 S T DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                        BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

              M.F.A. No.101189/2016 (MV)

BET WEEN

BALAPPA S/O SH IV AMURTAPPA B ELAHAR,
AGE AB OUT 42 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICU LTU RE,
R/O DANDAPUR, TQ: NARGU ND,
DISTR ICT: GADAG.
                                          ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MALLIKAR JUN S.HIREMAT H, ADVOCATE)

AND

1.    THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
      NWKRT C, GOKU L ROAD,
      HUBB ALLI (SELF INSU RANCE FUND).

2.    SOMALINGAPPA,
      S/O MALLAPPA SUNAGAR,
      AGE AB OU T 44 Y EARS,
      OCC: DRIVER, R/O KHANAPUR,
      TQ: GOKAK, DISTRICT: B ELAGAVI.

3.   SHANKAR SAMBAL S/O SILA PPA,
     AGE: MAJOR, OCC: DRIVER-CU M-OWNER,
     R/O SHANKARLING T EMPLE,
     NARGUND, DIST: GADAG.
                                      ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI S.C.BHUTI, ADVOCAT E FOR R1;
 NOTICE TO R2 DISPENSED WITH;
 NOTICE TO R3 SERVED)

     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEA L IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEH ICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST
THE J UDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 24.02.2 015 PASS ED IN
                                  2




MVC No.63/201 1 ON THE FIL E OF THE ADDIT IONA L
DISTR ICT AND SESSIONS JU DGE AND MOT OR ACCIDENT
CLAIMS TRIBU NAL, GADAG, PARTLY ALLOW ING T HE CLAIM
PET IT ION  FOR    COMPENSATION     AND      SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

     THIS APPEA L COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, TH IS DAY
THE COU RT DELIVERED THE FOLL OWING:

                            JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the claimant being not

satisfied with the quantum of compensation award ed by

the Court of Addl.District and Sessions Judge and

M.A.C.T., Gadag (hereinafter referred to as the

'Tribunal', for brevity) in MVC No.63/2011 vide its

judgment and award dated 24.02.2015.

2. Though this appeal is listed for admission,

with the consent of the learned counsels appearing

for the parties, the appeal is taken up for final

disposal. The parties to this appeal are referred to by

their rankings assigned to them before the Tribunal

for the sake of convenience.

3. Brief facts of the case that would be

relevant for the purpose of disposal of this appeal

are:

On 30.09.2009, the claimant along with his

friends was traveling in TATA ACE vehicle bearing

registration No.KA-26/6787 and when the said

vehicle reached near Noolvi cross, the tire of the

vehicle was punctured and therefore the vehicle was

parked by the side of the road and the inmates of the

vehicle had got down while some of the inmates were

still sitting in the vehicle. At that time, the offending

bus bearing registration No.KA25/F-2585 which was

driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner,

came from Bengaluru-Hubballi side and dashed

against the parked TATA ACE vehicle and caused the

accident. In the said accident, two persons had died

and some of the inmates of the vehicle were injured

and the vehicle was also damaged. The claimant had

suffered multiple injuries on his body and therefore

he was immediately admitted in a private hospital

wherein he was treated as an inpatient for about 12

days. The claimant thereafterwards had filed a claim

petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act,

1988 (for short, the 'Act') claiming compensation

from the owner and driver of the offending bus

bearing registration No.KA-25/F-2585 and the said

claim petition was partly allowed by the Tribunal

awarding compensation of `1,82,100/- with interest

at 6% per annum from the date of petition till

realization and the 1st respondent-owner of the

offending bus was directed to deposit the award

amount. Being not satisfied with the quantum of

compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant

has preferred this appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the claimant submits

that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal

compared to the injuries sustained and the treatment

undergone by the claimant is on the lower side. He

submits that no compensation has been awarded by

the Tribunal towards loss of income during the laid

up period. He also submits that the compensation

awarded towards pain and suffering and also towards

loss of amenities in the future life is on the lower

side. Accordingly, he prays to allow the appeal.

5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for

the owner of the offending bus submits that the

compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and

proper and needs no interference. He submits that

though the doctor had stated that the disability

caused to the claimant as a result of the injuries was

only to the tune of 22%, the Tribunal had taken the

whole body disability at 10% which is bad-in-law. He

submits that the rate of interest awarded by the

Tribunal is also on the higher side and therefore

there is no scope for interference in the appeal.

6. I have carefully appreciated the arguments

addressed on both sides and also perused the

material available on record.

7. The accident in question is not in dispute,

so also the fact that the injured claimant had

suffered injuries in the said accident wherein the

offending bus bearing registration No.KA-25/F-2585

belonging to the 1 s t respondent was involved. The

injured claimant had sustained the fracture of

posterior and lateral aspect of 4 t h to 11 t h ribs and

fracture of left scapula and other two grievous

injuries. In addition to the aforesaid fracture injuries,

it is also seen that the claimant had suffered

contusion of right upper and lower lobes and

contusion of lower pole of spleen and all these

injuries were said to be grievous in nature. The

Tribunal has taken into consideration the disability

caused to the injuries at 10% to the whole body and

the notional income of the injured has been rightly

considered at `5,000/- per month. The proper

applicable multiplier has been taken into

consideration by the Tribunal and a sum of `96,000/-

has been awarded towards loss of future income due

to disability and I am of the considered view that

there is no scope for interference regarding the

compensation awarded under the said head.

8. The Tribunal has not awarded any

compensation towards loss of income during the laid

up period. Having regard to the injuries and the

treatment undergone by the claimant atleast for a

period of three months, he is entitled for

compensation towards loss of income during the laid

up period. Therefore under the said head, he is

awarded a compensation of `15,000/-. Towards pain

and suffering, the claimant is entitled for a total

compensation of `50,000/- as against `30,000/-.

Towards loss of amenities, the claimant is entitled for

a total compensation of `30,000/- as against

`10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Towards

incidental expenses, the claimant is entitled for a

total compensation of `10,000/- as against `1,500/-

awarded by the Tribunal. Therefore in all, the

claimant is entitled for enhanced compensation of

`63,500/- and the enhanced amount of compensation

shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of

petition till realization.

9. Since the liability to pay the compensation

amount is not disputed by the owner of the offending

vehicle, the owner of the offending vehicle bearing

registration No.KA25/F-2585 is directed to deposit

the enhanced amount of compensation with interest

within a period of eight weeks from the date of

receipt of certified copy of this order.

10. Since the enhanced compensation amount

is only a meager amount, the claimant is entitled to

withdraw the same before the Tribunal. Accordingly,

the appeal is allowed in part.

11. Having regard to the order passed on

I.A.No.1/2016, it is made clear that the claimant is

not entitled for interest on the enhanced amount for

the delayed period of 329 days caused in filing the

appeal.

Sd/-

JUDGE CLK