Karnataka High Court
Sri Prakash vs M/S New India Assurance Co. Ltd on 5 July, 2022
Bench: Anant Ramanath Hegde
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JULY, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
M.F.A.NO.5864 OF 2016 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI PRAKASH,
S/O LATE VENKATARAYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS,
R/AT NO.43, BANDE BOMMASANDRA,
BIDARAHALLI HOBLI,
DODDA GUBBI,
BANGALORE SOUTH-560 049. ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI GURUDEVA PRASAD K T, ADV.)
AND:
1. M/S NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
MOTOR CLAIMS HUB, 3RD FLOOR,
MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS,
M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560001.
BY ITS MANAGER.
2. MR.PRAKASH,
MAJOR,
R/AT NO.256, 10TH MAIN,
1ST BLOCK, 100 FEET ROAD,
HRBR LAYOUT,
BANASWADI,
BANGALORE-560 043. ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI G.S.MARULAIAH, ADV. FOR R1,
NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD SUFFICIENT
V/O/DT: 29.05.2019)
2
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173 (1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.09.2015 PASSED IN MVC
NO.1346/14 ON THE FILE OF THE 5TH ADDITIONAL SMALL
CAUSES JUDGE & 24TH ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU,
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
Heard Sri. Gurudeva Prasad, the learned advocate
appearing for the appellant and Sri G S Marulaiah, the
learned advocate for 1st respondent. Notice to Respondent
2 is held sufficient vide order dated 29.05.2019.
2. Instant appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant
questioning both the liability as well as quantum vide
impugned judgment and award dated 02.09.2015 passed
by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal & V Additional
Judge, Court of Small Causes, Mayohall Unit, Bengaluru in
MVC 1346/2014. The tribunal has imposed the liability on
the 2nd respondent-driver. The petition is dismissed against
the insurer - respondent No.1.
3. The claim petition in MVC 1346/2014 was allowed
in part awarding compensation of Rs.2,08,300/- with
interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of petition till
realisation.
4. The insurer is absolved on the ground that there
is no permit to ply the vehicle involved in the accident.
The driving licence indicates that the driver had the licence
to drive the non-transport vehicle up to 20.02.2028 and
the transport vehicle up to 26.10.2016. The accident in
question occurred on 25.10.2013. Thus, it is apparent that
the vehicle i.e., car bearing Regn.No.KA-53/TR-797 is a
light motor vehicle involved in the accident and the driver
of the vehicle had the licence to drive the said vehicle.
5. The contention that the vehicle is a transport
vehicle and the driver did not have the endorsement to
drive thereof is not accepted in view of the law in
MUKUND DEWANGAN vs ORIENTAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LIMITED reported in (2017)14 SCC 663.
Under the circumstances, the contention of the insurer that
the insurer is not liable to pay the compensation to the
injured cannot be accepted. In terms of para.16 of the
impugned judgment, the tribunal has concluded that the
owner of the vehicle did not have the necessary permit to
ply the vehicle as a commercial vehicle.
6. Under the circumstances, the insurance company
can be directed to pay the compensation to the claimant
with the liberty to recover the same from the owner of the
vehicle. To that extent, the judgment and award
exonerating the insurance company have to be modified
and the compensation to be determined by this Court has
to be paid by the insurer with the liberty to recover the
same from the owner of the vehicle.
7. The learned counsel for the appellant would
submit that the claimant had suffered injuries mentioned
in para.17 of the impugned judgment: They are,
1. Deep wound below Rt Calcanium 15 cm,
in length 2.5 cms in-depth,
2. Bilateral nasal bone fracture,
3. Abrasion over the Rt Knee,
4. Roof of acetabulum fracture with
subluxation of the Rt hip joint.
He was inpatient for 35 days at different intervals. The
award of compensation of Rs.15,000/- under the head of
pain and suffering is grossly inadequate. The doctor has
also assessed the disability at 15% and the same has been
accepted by the tribunal. Considering 15% disability and
35 days of hospitalisation of the claimant, this Court is of
the view that under the head of 'pain and suffering'
Rs.15,000/-awarded by the tribunal is to be enhanced to
Rs.35,000/-.
8. Compensation awarded under the head of
nourishment, food and attendant charges at Rs.10,000/-
has to be enhanced by another Rs.10,000/-.
9. As regards loss of future earnings, Tribunal has
awarded Rs.1,51,200/-. The tribunal has considered the
notional income at Rs.6,000/-. Since the accident
occurred in the year 2013, national income has to be taken
at Rs.8,000/- per month as per the chart prepared by the
Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. Considering the
age of the claimant, the multiplier should be taken as '15'
and disability is taken at 15%. Therefore, the loss of
future earning capacity comes to Rs.2,16,000/-.
(Rs.8,000x12x15x15/100).
10. Compensation of Rs.5,000/- awarded by the
tribunal towards 'loss of amenities' is meagre looking to
the nature of injuries and disability sustained by the
claimant. Accordingly, it is enhanced to Rs.20,000/-.
11. It is also noticed that the claimant was an
inpatient for 35 days and no compensation is awarded for
the loss of income during the laid-up period. Therefore,
three months' earnings for the laid-up period are granted
which comes to Rs.24,000/-.
12. Compensation awarded by the tribunal towards
medical expenses, future medical expenses are
undisturbed.
13. Therefore, compensation awarded by this
Court is as under:
Sl. Heads of Award Amount in
No. Rs.
1. Pain and suffering 35,000.00
2. Nourishment, Food, 20,000.00
Attendant charges
3. Conveyance 3,000.00
4. Medical expenses 4,100.00
5. Loss of future earning 2,16,000.00
capacity
6. Future medical expenses 20,000.00
7. Loss of amenities 25,000.00
8. Loss of earnings during the 24,000.00
laid-up period
TOTAL 3,47,100.00
LESS: Compensation 2,08,300.00
awarded by the tribunal
Enhanced compensation 1,38,800.00
amount
13. Hence, the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated
02.09.2015 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal &
V Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Mayohall Unit,
Bengaluru in MVC No.1346/2014 is modified.
(iii) The appellant/claimant is entitled to enhanced
compensation of Rs.1,38,800.00 with interest @ 6% p.a.
from the date of petition till realisation excluding the
interest for the delayed period of 246 days for which the
claimant is not entitled to interest as per the order of this
Court dated 25.06.2019.
(iv) Respondent No.1 - the insurer is liable to deposit the
compensation amount within 8 weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
(v) In all other aspects, the award of the tribunal
remains intact.
Sd/-
JUDGE
.
BRN
