Karnataka High Court
Mallappa S/O. Basanaik Naikar vs Mahadev S/O. Bhimappa ... on 9 February, 2022
Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 9 T H DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY
M.F.A. No.24917/2013 (MV)
BET WEEN
SHRI MALLAPPA,
S/O B ASANAIK NAIKAR,
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: MASON,
R/O: KARIMANI, TQ: SAU NDAT TI,
DIST: B ELAGAVI,
NOW RESID ING AT B AILHONGAL,
DIST: B ELAGAVI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. HANAMANT R.LATU R, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. SHRI MAHADEV,
S/O B HIMAPPA B ANDIWADDAR,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O: NO-MEKALAMARDI,
TQ: B AILHONGAL,
DIST: B ELAGAVI.
2. THE DIV IS IONAL MANAGER,
NAT IONAL INSU RANCE COMPANY LIMIT ED,
RAMDEV GALL I, B ELAGAV I.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.G.N.RAICHU R, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEA L IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 1 73(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 A GAINST
THE J UDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.09.2013 PASS ED IN
MVC No.2004/ 2012 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND ADDIT IONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
2
TRIB UNAL, B AILHONGAL, PARTLY ALLOWING THE 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
The claimant b eing not satisfied with the quantum
of comp ensation awarded by the Senior Civil Judge and
Addl.Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bailhong al
(hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal', for brevity)
in MVC No.2004/2012 vide its judgment and award
dated 07.09.2013 has preferred this appeal seeking
enhancement of the compensation.
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 06.06.2012, when the claimant was walking
on the left side of the road near the land of one
Bolannavar on Bailhongal-Inchal road, the offending
motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-24/L-2413
which was driven in a rash and negligent manner
dashed against him and caused the accident. In the
said accident, the claimant suffered grievous injuries
and he was admitted in a private hospital at
Bailhongal wherein he was treated as an inpatient for
about 10 days. It is under these circumstances, the
claimant had filed a claim petition under Section 166
of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, the 'Act')
claiming compensation for the injuries suffered by
him in the road traffic accident. The said claim
petition was partly allowed by the Tribunal and
compensation of `1,61,800/- with interest at 6% per
annum from the date of petition till realization was
awarded. Being not satisfied with the quantum of
compensation, the claimant is before this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the claimant submits
that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal on all
heads is on the lower side. He submits that the
notional income of the claimant has been taken on
lower side having regard to the year of accident. He
also submits that the compensation awarded towards
pain and suffering and loss of future income and loss
of income during laid up period is on the lower side
and accordingly prays to allow the appeal.
5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for
the insurer submits that the compensation awarded
by the Tribunal is just and proper and needs no
interference by this Court and accordingly he prays
to dismiss the appeal.
6. I have given my anxious consideration to
the rival arguments addressed on both sides and also
perused the material available on record.
7. It is not in dispute that in the road traffic
accident that had taken place on 06.06.2012 in which
the offending motorcycle bearing registration
No.KA-24/L-2413 was involved, the claimant had
suffered grievous injuries and he was treated for the
same. It is also not in dispute that the offending
vehicle owned by the 1 s t respondent was insured by
the2nd respondent and the policy was in force as on
the date of accident. The only question that arises for
consideration in this appeal is with regard to the
adequacy of compensation awarded by the Tribunal
having regard to the injuries and disability suffered
by the claimant. The material on record would go to
show that the claimant had suffered fracture of right
ankle i.e. to medial malleolus and left central
malleolus and grievous injuries to back, wrist joint
and other parts of the body. He was admitted in a
private hospital at Bailhongal for about 10 days. The
doctor who had treated him in the said hospital has
been examined as PW3. He has assessed the
disability to the particular limb at 30% and the
Tribunal had rightly considered the said disability to
the whole body at 10%. The accident is of the year
2012 and therefore in view of the income chart
maintained by the Karnataka State Legal Services
Authority for the purpose of disposal of motor
accident claims cases before the Lok Adalath, the
notional income of the claimant ought to have been
taken into consideration at `6,500/- per month
instead of `4,000/-. The multiplier applicable having
regard to the age of the injured would be '10'. In the
said event, the claimant would be entitled for a
compensation of `1,17,000/- towards loss of future
income due to disability as against `72,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal.
8. Towards pain and suffering, the claimant is
entitled for a compensation of `45,000/- as against
`30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The
compensation awarded towards medical expenses and
incidental expenses remain unaltered. Towards loss
of income during laid up period, the claimant is
entitled for a total compensation of `24,000/- as
against `8,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The
compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards loss
of amenities remains unaltered. Therefore, in all, the
claimant is entitled for a total compensation of
`2,37,800/- as against a sum of `1,61,800/- awarded
by the Tribunal which would be as follows:
1 Loss of future income due `1,17,000/-
to disability
2 Pain and suffering `45,000/-
3 Medical medicine and `6,800/-
hospital charges
4 Nourishment charges `5,000/-
5 Attendant and conveyance `5,000/-
6 Loss of income during laid 24,000/-
up period
7 Loss of amenities `35,000/-
Total `2,37,800/-
The enhanced amount of compensation shall also
carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of
petition till realization.
9. Since the liability of respondent No.2-
Insurer is undisputed, the enhanced amount of
compensation with interest shall be deposited by
respondent No.2-Insurer before the Tribunal within a
period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the
certified copy of this judgment.
10. The enhanced amount being meager, the
claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount
before the Tribunal immediately after the same is
deposited. Accordingly, the appeal stands partly
allowed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
CLK
