Karnataka High Court
Palakshappa vs Channabasappa D on 7 July, 2022
Bench: H T Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JULY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MFA No.3828 OF 2020(MV)
BETWEEN
PALAKSHAPPA
S/O THIPPESHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
OCC AGRI AND COOLIE
R/O RAJAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE
CHANNAGIRI TALUK
DAVANGERE DISTRICT-577001.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT.SAVITHA KULKARNI., ADV.)
AND
1. CHANNABASAPPA D
S/O DANESHAPPA
AGED 33 YEARS
R/O RAJAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE
CHANNAGIRI TALUK
DAVANGERE -577001.
2. R K MURTHY
S/O E KENCHAPPA
2
AGED 27 YEARS
R/O RAJAGONDANAHALLI VILLAGE
CHANNAGIRI TALUK
DAVANGERE-577001.
3. THE MANAGER
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD
DIVISIONAL OFFICE
SHIVANARADAMUNI PLAZA
2ND FLOOR, M.C.C.B BLOCK
MEDICAL COLLEGE ROAD
DAVANGERE-577001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.E.I.SANMATHI, ADV. FOR R3:
NTOICE TO R1 & R2 IS DISPENSED WITH
V/O DATED: 07.07.2022)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF
MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED. 06.09.2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.754/2018,
ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
MACT, CHANNAGIRI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
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 6.9.2019 passed by MACT,
Channagiri in MVC 754/2018.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal
briefly stated are that on 2.2.2018 when the claimant
was proceeding on motorcycle bearing registration
No.KA-17-EX-8279 as a pillion rider, at that time,
rider of the said motorcycle rode the same at a high
speed and in a rash and negligent manner, lost
control, fell down. 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 respondents
appeared through their respective counsel and filed
written statements 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 Dr.Satwik was examined as
PW-2 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to
Ex.P17. On behalf of the respondents, one witness
was examined as RW-1 and got exhibited documents
namely Ex.R1. 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.301,640/- along with interest at the rate of 6%
p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to deposit
the compensation amount along with interest. Being
aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimant has
raised the following contentions:
Firstly, even though the claimant claims that he
was earning Rs.2,40,000/- per annum, but the
Tribunal has taken the notional income as merely as
Rs.6,000/- per month.
Secondly, the claimant has examined the doctor
as PW-2. The doctor in his evidence has stated that
the claimant has suffered disability of 25% to
particular limb. But the Tribunal has taken the whole
body disability at 11%, which is on the lower side.
Thirdly, due to the accident, the claimant has
sustained grievous injuries. He was treated as
inpatient for a period of 6 days. 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
compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the
heads of 'loss of amenities', 'pain and sufferings' and
other incidental expenses are on the lower side.
Hence, he sought for allowing the appeal.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for
the Insurance Company has raised following counter
contentions:
Firstly, even though the claimant claims that he
was earning Rs.240,000/- per annum, he has not
produced any documents to establish his income.
Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the
income of the claimant notionally.
Secondly, the doctor in his evidence has stated
that the claimant has suffered disability of 25% to
particular limb. The Tribunal considering the injuries
sustained by the claimant, has rightly assessed the
whole body disability at 11%.
Thirdly, considering the injuries sustained by the
claimant and considering the age and avocation of the
claimant, the overall compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is just and reasonable and it does not call for
interference. 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 claimant has
sustained injuries in the road traffic accident occurred
due to rash and negligent driving of the offending
vehicle by its driver.
The claimant claims that he was earning
Rs.240,000/- per annum. He has not produced any
documents to prove his income. Therefore, in the
absence of proof of income, notional income has to be
assessed. As per the guidelines issued by the
Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, for the
accident taken place in the year 2018, the notional
income has to be taken at Rs.12,500/- p.m.
As per wound certificate, the claimant has
sustained bleeding from the ear, scalp, haemotoma
left perfal 3x2 cm. The doctor in his evidence has
stated that the claimant has suffered disability of
25% to particular limb. Therefore, taking into
consideration the deposition of the doctor and injuries
mentioned in the wound certificate, the Tribunal has
rightly taken the whole body disability at 11%. The
claimant is aged about 28 years at the time of the
accident and multiplier applicable to his age group is
'17'. Thus, the claimant is entitled for compensation of
Rs.280,500/- (Rs.12,500*12*17*11%) on account of
'loss of future income'.
The nature of injuries suggests that the claimant
must have been under rest and treatment for a period
of 2 months. Therefore, the claimant is entitled for
compensation of Rs.25,000/- (Rs.12,500*2 months)
under the head 'loss of income during laid up period'.
The claimant was treated as inpatient for more
than 6 days in the hospital and thereafter, has
received further treatment. Hence, I am inclined to
enhance the compensation awarded under the head of
'conveyance, nourishment and attendance charges'
from Rs.6,000/- to Rs.10,000/-.
Due to the accident, the claimant has suffered
grievous injuries and also undergone surgery. He has
suffered lot of pain during treatment and he has to
suffer with the disability stated by the doctor
throughout his life. Considering the same, I am
inclined to enhance the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal under the head of 'loss of amenities' from
Rs.35,000/- to Rs.45,000/- and under the head of
'pain and sufferings' from Rs.45,000/- to Rs.50,000/-.
Considering the nature of injuries, the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other
heads is just and reasonable.
10. Thus, the claimant is entitled to the
following compensation:
As awarded As awarded
Compensation under by the by this
different Heads Tribunal Court
(Rs.) (Rs.)
Pain and sufferings 45,000 50,000
Medical and incidental 75,000 75,000
expenses
Food, nourishment, 6,000 10,000
conveyance and
attendant charges
Loss of income during 6,000 25,000
laid up period
Loss of amenities 35,000 45,000
Loss of future income 134,640 280,500
Total 301,640 485,500
11. 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.485,500/-.
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the compensation amount along with interest @ 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.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DM
