Karnataka High Court

Chikku @ Chikkanna S/O ... vs P K Karuppan S/O Periasamy on 19 January, 2022

Bench: S.Vishwajith Shetty

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
                   DHARWAD BENCH

      DATED THIS THE 19 T H DAY OF JANUARY, 2022

                        BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY

                 M.F.A. No.22715/2010
                          C/W
                 M.F.A. No.22717/2010,
                 M.F.A. No.22718/2010

IN MFA No.22715/2010

BET WEEN

1.    SURESH S/O. DATT AT REYA MINASE
      AGE: 70 Y EARS, OCC: NIL.

2.    MINAL S/O. SU RESH MINASE,
      AGE: 34 YEARS,
      OCC: SEEDS CO SU PERVIS OR.

3.    NIKET S/ O. SURESH MINASE,
      AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: NIL.

4.    SRUTI D/O. SU RESH MINASE,
      AGE: 19 YEARS,
      OCC: HOU SE HOLD WORK,
      ALL ARE R/O. DEVALGORAJA
      DIST: BU LDAN, MAHARASTRA STATE.   ...APPELLANT S

(BY SRI PATIL M.H. AND G.S.HU LAMANI, ADVS.)

AND

1.    P.K. KARU PPAN S/O. PER IASAMY,
      AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: BU SINESS,
      R/O.95/ 142, SOUT H NALLIYAMPA LAYAM,
      VELUR POST, NAMMAKAL DIST,
      STATE: TAMILNADU.
                             2




2.    THE DIV IS IONAL MANAGER,
      NAT IONAL INSU RANCE CO. LT D.
      SUJ AT A COMPLEX , P.B .ROAD,
      HUBLI.                             ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI GANGADH AR HOSAKERI, ADV. FOR R2;
 NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)


IN MFA No.22717/2010

BETWEEN

KU MARI KU SHI D/O. MINAL MINASE
AGE: 4 Y EARS SINCE MINOR REP M/G,
MOHIN W/O. MINA L MINASE,
AGE: 27 YEARS, OCC: HOUSE HOLD,
R/O. DEVALGORAJ A DIST: BULDAN
MAHARASTRA STATE,
NOW AT MRUTHU NJAYA NAGAR,
RANEB ENNUR DIST HAVERI.                 ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI PATIL M.H. AND G.S.HU LAMANI, ADVS.)

AND

1.    P. KARU PPAN S/O. PERIASAMY,
      AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: BU SINESS,
      R/O.95/ 142, SOUT H NALLIYAMPA LAYAM,
      VELUR POST, NAMMAKAL DIST,
      STATE: TAMILNADU.

2.    THE DIV IS IONAL MANAGER,
      NAT IONAL INSU RANCE CO. LT D.
      SUJ AT A COMPLEX , P.B .ROAD,
      HUBLI.                             ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI GANGADH AR HOSAKERI, ADV. FOR R2;
 NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
                             3




IN MFA No.22718/2010

BETWEEN

CHIKKU @ CHIKKANNA,
S/O. KRISHNAMURTHY NADIGER,
AGE: 44 YEARS, OCC: AGRICU LT URE,
R/O. RANEB ENNU R, DIST : HAVERI.        ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI PATIL M.H. AND G.S.HU LAMANI, ADVS.)

AND

1     P.K. KARU PPAN S/O. PERIASAMY,
      AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: BU SINESS,
      R/O.95/ 142, SOUT H NALLIYAMPA LAYAM,
      VELUR POST, NAMMAKAL DIST,
      STATE: TAMILNADU.

2.    THE DIV IS IONAL MANAGER,
      NAT IONAL INSU RANCE CO. LT D.
      SUJ AT A COMPLEX , P.B .ROAD,
      HUBLI.                             ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI GANGADH AR HOSAKERI, ADV. FOR R2;
 NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)

     M.F.A.No.22715/ 2010   IS  F ILED  U NDER  SECTION
173(1) OF MOTO R VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.02.2010 PASSED IN MVC
No. 71/ 2006 IN T HE FILE OF T HE FAST TRACK JU DGE,
RENEB ENNU R, PARTLY ALLOWIN G T HE CLAIM PET IT ION FOR
COMPENSATION      AND     SEEKING     ENHANCEMENT     OF
COMPENSATION.

     M.F.A.No.22717/ 2010  IS F ILED  U NDER  SECTION
173(1) OF MOTO R VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.02.2010 PASSED IN MVC
No. 73/2006 IN THE FILE OF THE     PRES IDING OFF ICER,
FAST TRACK JU DGE, RENEB ENNU R, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM   PET IT ION FOR   COMPENSAT ION   AND  S EEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

     M.F.A.No.22718/ 2010 IS F ILED U NDER SECTION
173(1) OF MOTO R VEHICLES ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.02.2010 PASSED IN MVC
                                4




No. 74/2006 IN THE FILE OF TH E PRES IDING OFFICER,
FAST TRACK COURT, RENEB ENNUR, PARTLY ALL OWIN G THE
CLAIM  PET IT ION FOR COMPENSAT ION   AND   S EEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

     THESE APPEA LS COMING ON F OR ORDERS, THIS DAY
THE COU RT DELIVERED THE FOLL OWING:

                         JUDGMENT

These three appeals filed by the claimants seeking

enhancement of comp ensation arise out of the common

judgment and award passed by the Fast Track Court &

MACT, Raneb ennur, in MVC Nos.71, 73 & 74 of 2006

disposed of on 11.02.2010, and therefore, all the

app eals are heard tog ether and disposed of by this

common judgment.

2. For the sake of convenience, the p arties are

referred to by their ranking assigned to them b efore

the Tribunal.

3. Though these app eals are listed for orders, with

consent of the learned Counsel for both sid es, they are

taken up for final disposal.

4. The undisputed facts of the case are, the

deceased in MVC No.71/2006 and claimants in the

other two claim petitions were travelling in a Tempo

Trax bearing registration No.KA-27/M-758 on

30.06.2005 and at about 3.30 a.m. on Pune-

Bangalore road, the offending truck bearing

registration No.TN-28/C-8866 which was driven in a

rash and negligent manner by its driver dashed

against the tempo trax and caused the accident. In

the said accident, deceased Shilpa who was severely

injured, had succumbed to the injuries in the

hospital. The other claimants who had also sustained

injuries were all treated in the hospital. The legal

representatives of deceased Shilpa and the injured

claimants had filed claim petitions under Section 166

of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, seeking

compensation from the owner and insurer of the

offending lorry bearing registration No.TN-28/C-8866

and the Tribunal had partly allowed the said claim

petitions awarding compensation in all the said claim

petitions as under:

Total compensation Case No. awarded M.V.C.No.71/2006 `2,89,000/-

      M.V.C.No.73/2006                            `9,000/-
      M.V.C.No.74/2006                           `2,78,537/-

The    Tribunal     had      awarded       6%     interest     on   the

compensation amount from the date of petition till

realization and had directed the Insurer of the

offending lorry to deposit the compensation amount

before the Tribunal. Being not satisfied with the

compensation amount awarded, the claimants in

these three cases have preferred these appeals.

5. Learned Counsel for the appellants submits

that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in all

the three cases is on the lower side. He submits that

in MVC No.71/2006, the income of the deceased

ought to have been taken at `3,500/- as against

`3,000/- taken by the Tribunal. He also submits that

the proper multiplier applicable having regard to the

age of the deceased is 13 and not 11. He submits

that compared to the injuries, the claimants have not

been properly awarded compensation.

6. Per contra, learned Counsel appearing for the

Insurer submits that the compensation awarded by

the Tribunal in all the three cases is just and proper

and needs no interference. However, he does not

dispute the liability of the Insurer having regard to

the fact that the offending vehicle was duly insured

with the Insurer as on the date of the accident.

7. I have given my anxious consideration to the

arguments advanced by the learned Counsel on both

sides and also perused the material on record.

8. The claimants in MVC No.71/2006 are the

husband and children of deceased Shilpa who had

died in the accident in question. Deceased Shilpa was

aged about 50 years. The accident had taken place in

the year 2005, and therefore, as per the income chart

maintained by the Karnataka State Leg al Services

Authority for the purpose of disposing of road traffic

accid ent claim cases before the Lok Ad alath, the

notional income of the deceased ought to have been

taken at ` 3,500/- instead of 3,000/-. 25% of the said

income is required to be taken into consid eration

towards loss of future p rospects of the d eceased. Out

of the total income, 1/4 t h of the same is required to be

deducted towards the personal expenses of the

deceased and having regard to the ag e of the

deceased, the proper multip lier applicable in the case

would be '13'. In the said event, the claimants are

entitled for a sum of `5,11,836/- towards loss of

dependency and towards loss of consortium and

towards filial love and affection, the claimants being

the husb and and child ren are entitled for a sum of

`40,000/- each and in addition to the same, they are

entitled for a further sum of `30,000/- towards funeral

exp enses and loss of estate. Therefore, und er the

conventional heads, the claimants are tog ether entitled

for a sum of `1,90,000/-. In all, the claimants are

entitled for a total compensation of `7,01,836/-. The

enhanced amount of compensation shall carry interest

at 6% per annum from the date of p etition till

realization.

9. In MVC No.73/2006, the claimant is a minor

who was ag ed about 3½ years at the time of accident.

The injured claimant had suffered four simple injuries

and she was treated in the private hosp ital for the

same. The med ical bills at Exs.P.21 to 23 would totally

amount to `3,420/-. This would go to show that the

minor would have und ergone p ain and agony during the

treatment undergone by her. The Trib unal has globally

award ed compensation of `9,000/- with interest at 6%

per annum. Having reg ard to the facts and

circumstances of the case and considering the medical

bills at Exs.P.21 to P.23, I am of the consid ered view

that if a compensation amount of `15,000/- is award ed

globally to the claimant with interest at 6% p er annum,

from the date of petition till realization, the same

would meet the ends of justice.

10. In MVC No.74/2006, the claimant had suffered

the following injuries:

1. The petitioner was unconscious with altered.

2. CLW over middle of chest, 2"x1"x1"

bleeding present.

3. CLW over middle of tongue 1/2"x1/2"x1/2" b leeding present.

4. upper incisor tooth (Rt.) sid e are loosened.

5. Vomiting is present.

6. Patient is unable to open his month and tenderness present over both maxillary region.

Consid ering the nature of injuries and the treatment

und ergone by the claimant, the Tribunal has award ed

comp ensation to the injured claimant as under:

      i) Pain and agony                        `45,000/-

      ii) Medical expenses                     `1,41,000/-

      iii) Loss of income during
           laidup period                       `20,000/-

iv) Loss of future earning capacity `42,537/-

v) Future medical expenses `10,000/-

      vi) Loss of future unhappiness
          and loss of amenities                `20,000/-

                  Total                        `2,78,537/-

11. In my consid ered view, the Tribunal und er all

the aforesaid heads has award ed just and proper

comp ensation to the claimants. However, toward s the

incidental exp enses incurred b y claimant during the

course of treatment, the Tribunal has not awarded any

comp ensation. Therefore, an amount of `15,000/- is

award ed to the claimants towards the incidental

exp enses and this amount shall carry interest at 6%

per annum from the d ate of petition till realization.

13. The liab ility of the Insurer is not in disp ute,

and therefore, in all the three cases, the enhanced

amount of compensation with interest shall be