Sri Shivappa D C vs The Chairman And Managing ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 10331 Kant

                        1




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JULY 2022

                     BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD

          MFA No.2257 OF 2021(MV)

BETWEEN

SRI SHIVAPPA D C
S/O CHIKKAMUNIYAPPA
AGEDA BOUT 36 YEARS
R/AT NO.156, CHELEKERE
K.R.PURAM, BENGALURU-560043.
                                   ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI. VIJAY KUMAR T., ADV.)

AND

THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR
APSRTC, MUSHEERABAD
HYDERABAD 500020.
                               ...RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.D VIJAYAKUMAR, ADV.)

    THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF
MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED. 18.06.2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.4879/2016,
ON THE FILE OF THE VII-ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES
JUDGE AND XXXII ACMM., MEMBER, MACT-3,
BENGALURU,    PARTLY    ALLOWING   THE   CLAIM
                                  2




PETITION FOR COMPENSATION                  AND     SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

     THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                          JUDGMENT

This appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor

Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the

Act') has been filed by the claimant being aggrieved

by the judgment dated 18.6.2019 passed by MACT,

Bengaluru in MVC 4879/2016.

2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal

briefly stated are that on 24.5.2016 when the

claimant was driving motorcycle bearing No.KA-53-H-

6159 from Doddanallurahalli to factory gate, at that

time, APSRTC bus bearing registration No.AP-04-Z-

0141 being driven by its driver at a high speed and in

a rash and negligent manner, dashed to the vehicle of

the claimant. As a result of the aforesaid accident,

the claimant sustained grievous injuries and was

hospitalized.

3. The claimant filed a petition under Section

166 of the Act seeking compensation. It was pleaded

that he spent huge amount towards medical

expenses, conveyance, etc. It was further pleaded

that the accident occurred purely on account of the

rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by

its driver.

4. On service of notice, the respondent

appeared through counsel and filed written statement

in which the averments made in the petition were

denied.

5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties,

the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter

recorded the evidence. The claimant himself was

examined as PW-1 and got exhibited documents

namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P13. On behalf of the

respondents, neither any witness was examined nor

any document was produced. The Claims Tribunal, by

the impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the

accident took place on account of rash and negligent

driving of the offending vehicle by its driver, as a

result of which, the claimant sustained injuries. The

Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled to a

compensation of Rs.4,12,252/- along with interest at

the rate of 8% p.a. and directed the Corporation to

deposit the compensation amount along with interest.

Being aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed.

6. The learned counsel for the claimant has

contended that as per wound certificate, the claimant

has sustained lacerated wound over chin, just below

lower lip, over left mandible region, tenderness

present over left side of chest, left hypochondriac

region, neck and multiple injuries. He was treated as

inpatient for a period of 12 days. He has produced

medical bills amounting to Rs.3,12,252/- at Ex.P-13.

Even after discharge from the hospital, he was not in

a position to discharge his regular work. He has

suffered lot of pain during treatment. Considering the

same, the overall compensation granted by the

Tribunal is on the lower side. Hence, he sought for

allowing the appeal.

7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for

the Corporation has contended that the claimant has

sustained simple injuries and he has not examined the

doctor regarding disability and injuries suffered by

him. Considering the same, the Tribunal has granted

just and reasonable compensation and it does not call

for interference. Further, the interest awarded by the

Tribunal at 8% p.a. on the compensation amount is on

the higher side. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the

appeal.

8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties

and perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.

9. It is not in dispute that the accident has

occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the

offending vehicle by its driver.

As per wound certificate, the claimant has

sustained lacerated wound over chin, just below lower

lip, over left mandible region, tenderness present over

left side of chest, left hypochondriac region, neck and

multiple injuries. He was treated as inpatient for a

period of 12 days. He has produced medical bills for

Rs.3,12,252/- at Ex.P-13. He has not examined the

doctor regarding disability suffered by him. Therefore,

considering the evidence of the claimant and nature of

injuries mentioned in the wound certificate, I am

inclined to award compensation of Rs.40,000/- in

addition to compensation of Rs.4,12,252/- awarded by

the Tribunal.

10. In the result, the appeal is allowed in

part. The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.

The claimant is entitled to a total compensation

of Rs.4,52,252/-.

The respondent-Corporation is directed to

deposit the compensation amount along with interest

@ 8% p.a. (enhanced amount shall carry interest at

6% p.a.) from the date of filing of the claim petition

till the date of realization, within a period of six weeks

from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.

In view of the order dated 4.7.2022 passed by

this Court, the claimant is not entitled for interest for

the delayed period of 162 days in filing the appeal.

Sd/-

JUDGE DM