Karnataka High Court
Jayanna vs Govindappa on 13 July, 2022
Bench: H T Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF JULY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MFA No.715 OF 2020(MV)
BETWEEN:
JAYANNA
S/O. HONNAPPA
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS
PRIVATE TEACH
AND AGRICULTURIST
R/AT JOGAMMANAHALLY VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI
HOSADURGA TALUK
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT-577 527.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GIREESHA S.N., ADV. FOR
SRI.MANJUNATH N D., ADV.)
AND:
1. GOVINDAPPA
S/O. MARADAPPA
MAJOR
R/O. HUNAVINADU VILLAGE
KASABA HOBLI
HOSADURGA TALUK-577 527
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
THE NATIONAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LTD.,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE
MELUGIRI PLAZA, M.C.C.
2
B BLOCK, DENTAL COLLEGE ROAD
DAVANAGERE-577 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT.NIRMALA, ADV. FOR R2:
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH
VIDE ORDER DATED: 10.03.2022)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION.173(1) OF MV
ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DT.15.02.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.1247/2017 ON THE
FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT,
HOSADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION
FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, 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 and decree dated 15.02.2019 passed
by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hosadurga in MVC
No.1247/2017.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal
briefly stated are that on 28.03.2017 at about 08.30
P.M., when the claimant along with another was
proceeding on motorcycle bearing Registration No.KA-
16-R-2013 from Hosadurga Town to their Village, in
front of APMC Market, near Sri Shaneswara Temple on
Hosadurga-Huliyuru road, the rider of the another
motorcycle bearing Registration No.KA-16-ED-7402
coming from opposite side, rode the same in a rash
and negligent manner, dashed against the motorcycle
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 riding of the offending vehicle by
its rider.
4. On service of notice, the respondent Nos.1
and 2 have appeared through counsel and only
respondent No.2 has filed written statement in which
the averments made in the petition were denied. It
was pleaded that the petition itself is false and
frivolous in the eye of law. The age, avocation and
income of the claimant and the medical expenses are
denied. It was further pleaded that the quantum of
compensation claimed by the claimant is exorbitant.
Hence, he sought for dismissal of the petition.
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.P14. On behalf of the
respondents, no witness was examined but got
exhibited a document namely Ex.R1. The Claims
Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held
that the accident took place on account of rash and
negligent riding of the offending vehicle by its rider, as
a result of which, the claimant sustained injuries. The
Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled to a
compensation of Rs.50,000/- 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, this appeal has been
filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimant has
contended that due to the accident, the claimant has
suffered three injuries i.e. 1) pain and swelling and
cut lacerated wound on right foot, 2) pain and swelling
over right hand right finger and 3) pain and swelling
over left shoulder. He has spent more than
Rs.1,00,000/- for medical expenses. He has suffered
lot of pain during the treatment. The compensation of
Rs.50,000/- granted by the Tribunal is on lower side.
Hence, he sought for enhancement of compensation.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for
the Insurance Company has contended that three
injuries suffered by the claimant are minor in nature.
He has not examined the doctor. Therefore,
considering the documents available on record and
considering the evidence of PW-1, the Tribunal has
granted just and reasonable compensation. Hence, he
sought for dismissal of the appeal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties
and perused the records.
9. It is not in dispute that the claimant has
sustained injuries in the road traffic accident occurred
due to rash and negligent riding of the offending
vehicle by its rider.
As per wound certificate, the claimant has
sustained pain and swelling and cut lacerated wound
on right foot, pain and swelling over right hand right
finger and pain and swelling over left shoulder. He has
not examined the doctor. He has spent more than
Rs.1,00,000/- for medical expenses. Therefore,
considering the evidence of PW-1, considering the
medical bills, discharge summary and the injuries
suffered by the claimant, I am of the opinion that in
addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal,
another Rs.25,000/- can be awarded with interest.
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.75,000/- against Rs.50,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal.
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the compensation amount along with interest 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 10.03.2022 passed by
this Court, the claimant is not entitled for interest for
the delayed period of 187 days in filing the appeal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HA/-
