Basavaraj S/O Fakkiresh Karadi vs Ashok S/O Basanagouda Agasibagil
2022 Latest Caselaw 2669 Kant

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   DHARWAD BENCH

      DATED THIS THE 17 T H DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2022

                        BEFORE

      THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

              M.F.A. No.101789/2018 (MV)

BET WEEN

BASAVARAJ,
S/O FAKKIRESH KARADI,
AGE: 28 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICU LTU RE,
R/O: B ASANAKATTI,
TQ AND DIST: HAVERI.
                                           ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI PATIL M.H. AND
 SRI H.M.PATIL, ADVOCATES)

AND

1 .    ASHOK,
       S/O B ASANAGOU DA AGASIB AGIL
       ASST. MANAGER,
       STATE B ANK OF INDIA (ADB )
       HAVER I, AT : SHRIRAMANAKOPPA
       POST: DIV IG IHAL LI,
       TQ: HIREK ERUR-581210,
       OWNER OF CAR NO.KA-27/M-7451.

2 .    THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
       R/B Y ITS BRANCH OFFICER
       AT MUKTALI BU ILDING,
       HANAGAL ROAD, OPP: B U S STAND,
       HAVER I- 581110.
                                        ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI RAJASHEKHAR S.ARANI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
 NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
                                2




     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEA L IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEH ICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST
THE J UDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.01.2 018 PASS ED IN
MVC No.31/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE PR INCIPA L SENIOR
CIVIL J UDGE AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIB U NAL,
HAVER I,   PARTLY   ALLOWING       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

The claimant has preferred this app eal being not

satisfied with the quantum of comp ensation amount

award ed by the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge

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

'Tribunal', for brevity) in MVC No.31/2016 vide its

judgment and award dated 23.01.2018.

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 before the Tribunal for the purpose of

convenience.

3. The undisputed facts of the case are that

on 03.05.2015 when the claimant was proceeding

from Byadgi towards Motebennur in his motorcycle

bearing registration No.KA-27/EB-3140, when he

reached near Nagappa Byadgi's house at Motebennur,

the offending Maruti car bearing registration

No.KA-27/M-7451 which was driven in a rash and

negligent manner by its driver dashed against his

motorcycle and caused the accident in which the

claimant has suffered grievous injuries and he was

admitted in government hospital. It is under these

circumstances, the claimant has filed a claim petition

under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988

(for short, the 'Act'), which was partly allowed by the

Tribunal and compensation of `47,500/- was awarded

with interest at 6% per annum and the owner and

insurer of the offending car were directed to deposit

the compensation amount. Being not satisfied with

the quantum of compensation awarded, the claimant

is before this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the claimant submits

that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on

the lower side and seeks enhancement.

5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for

the insurer submits that the injuries suffered by the

claimant are simple in nature and the compensation

awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and

therefore there is no scope for enhancement and

accordingly, he prays to dismiss the appeal.

6. 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 suffered by the claimant

and the treatment taken by him for the same. Ex.P5

is the wound certificate; a perusal of the same would

go to show that in addition to the simple injuries, the

claimant had also suffered fracture of 2 n d , 3 r d and 4 t h

metatarsal bone. However he had not produced any

document before the Tribunal with regard to the

treatment taken by him for the same nor he had

examined the doctor who had treated him. The

claimant had deposed before the Tribunal that he had

undergone treatment for the injuries and was

admitted in District Government Hospital for about 10

days. The Tribunal taking into consideration that the

wound certificate reflected a fracture injury and that

the claimant was treated in a government hospital,

has awarded a total compensation of `47,500/- with

interest at 6% per annum. Since the claimant has not

produced any material before the Tribunal with

regard to the treatment taken by him in respect of

the alleged fracture injury, I am of the considered

view that if the compensation amount awarded by the

Tribunal is globally enhanced by a sum of `10,000/-

that would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, the

following:

ORDER

The Miscellaneous First Appeal is partly allowed.

The claimant is awarded a further sum of `10,000/- globally in addition to the

compensation of `47,500/- awarded by the Tribunal.

The enhanced compensation amount awarded shall carry interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization.

The respondent-insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced amount of compensation with interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment.

           Since      the        enhanced          amount      of
      compensation is         meager, the           claimant is

permitted to withdraw the entire amount before the Tribunal, on proper identification.

Sd/-

JUDGE

CLK