Karnataka High Court
Sri C Ravi vs The Branch Manager on 7 February, 2022
Bench: P.Krishna Bhat
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 07th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P. KRISHNA BHAT
MFA No. 12270/2011 (MV)
BETWEEN
SRI. C. RAVI
S/O CHANDRAPPA,
AGED 33 YEARS,
R/AT W-2 BLOCK,
POLICE QUARTERS,
RAMAKRISHNA HEGDE NAGAR,
BENGALURU-45. ... APPELLANT
(BY SMT.GAYATHRI RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE BRANCH MANAGER
THE ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
#62/1, II FLOOR, PRESTIGE CORNER,
RICHMOND ROAD,
BANGALORE-25.
2. SRI. A. RAJAPPA J.M.,
S/O MUNISANJEEVAPPA,
R/AT NO.25/5, JARAGANAHALLI,
MUNISANJEEVAPPA LAYOUT,
J.P.NAGAR, BENGALURU-78. ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K.S.LAKSHMINARASAPPA ADV., FOR
2
SRI. A.M.VENKATESH, ADV., FOR R-1)
SRI. H.C.NATARAJ, ADV., FOR R-2)
MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 08.09.2011 PASSED IN
MVC NO. 8307/2009 ON THE FILE OF THE XIX
ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE, MACT, BANGALORE,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is at the instance of claimant seeking
enhancement of the compensation awarded in MVC
No.8307/2009 by judgment and award dated 08.09.2011
by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore.
2. The claim petition proceeded on the allegation that
on 06.10.2009 at about 9.30 am when the claimant was
proceeding in a two wheeler bearing Reg. No.KA-50-G-11
as a pillion rider near Kengeri-Magadi Ring Road, near TCI
Indian Oil Corporation, a lorry bearing Reg. No.KA-05-AB-
8844 came in a rash and negligent manner in high speed
and dashed to the two wheeler from behind resulting in
grievous injuries to the claimant.
3. Before the learned Tribunal, the Insurance Company
entered appearance and filed its statement of objections.
The owner of the vehicle (2nd respondent) remained
exparte. Insurance Company in its detailed written
statement denied the material averments in the claim
petition.
4. During trial, the claimant examined as P.W.1 and
got marked Ex.P1 to P15. the respondents did not examine
any witnesses and no documents were marked.
5. After hearing the learned counsel on both the sides
and perusing the record, learned Tribunal allowed the
claim petition in part and awarded a compensation of
Rs.1,54,300/- with interest at 6% per annum from the
date of petition till its realization.
6. Heard.
7. There is no dispute about the fact that claimant was
working as a police constable and Ex.P.9 is his salary
certificate, Ex.P5 is wound certificate which shows that he
had suffered a fracture of right femur in the accident.
8. The insurance company is not questioning the
negligence on the part of the driver of the insured vehicle
or its liability to pay the compensation.
9. The claimant has not examined any medical expert
to show any disability suffered by the claimant and in any
case, he is a police constable and there is nothing to show
that on account of injury suffered, he has been put in
economically disadvantageous position by his employer.
10. The evidence shows that the claimant was inpatient
for a period of 19 days. Taking into consideration all these
aspects, learned Tribunal has awarded compensation
under various heads as follows:
1. Towards pain and sufferings Rs.65,000/-
2. Towards loss of earnings Rs,27,300/-
3. Towards conveyance, attendant Rs.12,000/-
and nourishing food
4. Towards discomfort, loss of Rs.35,000/-
amenities in life and future
unhappiness
5. Towards disfigurement Rs.15,000
Total Rs.1,54,300/-
11. The above shows that the learned Tribunal has
awarded of compensation in a reasonable manner and
therefore, no good grounds are made out to grant
enhancement on any one of the heads of award of
compensation. Accordingly, there is no merit in this appeal
and it is accordingly, dismissed.
12. The records shall be transmitted to the learned MACT
forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE
JS/NM
