Karnataka High Court
Sri Raju vs Sri Shivaswamy on 21 July, 2022
Bench: H T Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MFA No.2765 OF 2020(MV)
BETWEEN:
SRI RAJU
S/O LATE THIMMEGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
R/AT KAMANAGUDI CIRCLE
JEEVANRAO GALLI M G ROAD
RAMANAGARA TOWN-562 115.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. TEJAS N., ADV.)
AND:
1. SRI. SHIVASWAMY
S/O CHIKKAPUTTAPPA
AGE MAJOR
R/AT CHANNENAHALLI
KASABA HOBLI
RAMANAGARA TALUK-562114.
2. THE MANAGER
UNITED INDIA ASSURANCE
COMPANY LTD.,
RVR COMPLEX BEHIND KSRTC
BUS STAND OPPOSITE LIC OFFICE
IJOOR, RAMANAGARA TOWN-562 115.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.B.A. RAMAKRISHNA, ADV. FOR R2:
NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W V/O DTD: 30.05.2022)
2
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED:23.12.2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.214/2016, ON
THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE AND MACT, RAMANAGARA,
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 dated 23.12.2019 passed by the
Principal Senior Civil Judge & CJM and MACT,
Ramanagar in MVC No.214/2016.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal
briefly stated are that on 06.01.2016 at about 02.30
p.m. the claimant was going on a motor cycle bearing
Registration No.KA-42-R-8461 as a pillion rider, when
the rider reached near Manchanabele channel,
Kannamangala, Ramanagara Taluk, at the same time,
the driver of the Tractor bearing Registration No.KA-
07-T-1734 drove the same in a very rash and
negligent manner so as to endangering the human life
and dashed to 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 she 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 Nos.1
and 2 have appeared through counsel and only
respondent No.2 filed written statement in which the
averments made in the petition were denied. 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, they 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 Dr.Ramesh.B was examined as
PW-2 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to
Ex.P53. 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.5,60,000/- 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, the present appeal has been filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimant has
contended that due to the accident, the claimant has
sustained grievous injuries. He has examined the
doctor. The doctor has deposed that the claimant has
communited fracture inter trochanter region and shaft
of right femer and fracture P.P. Ring finger underwent.
He was inpatient in the hospital for a period of 10
days. He has suffered lot of pain during the treatment.
The compensation of Rs.5,60,000/- with 6% interest
awarded 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 injuries
suffered by the claimant are minor in nature. He was
inpatient in the hospital only for a period of 10 days.
He further contended that even as per the Notional
Income Chart prepared by the Karnataka State Legal
Services Authority, for the accident taken place in the
year 2016, the notional income has to be taken at
Rs.9,500/- p.m. But the Tribunal has considered the
monthly income of the claimant as R.10,000/- is on
higher side. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the
appeal. Considering the age and injuries suffered by
the claimant and considering the medical bills, the
Tribunal has granted just and reasonable
compensation and it does not call for interference.
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 driving of the offending
vehicle by its driver.
Due to the accident, the claimant has sustained
communited fracture inter trochanter region and shaft
of right femer and fracture P.P. Ring finger underwent.
He has suffered lot of pain during the treatment. He
was inpatient in the hospital only for a period of 10
days. He has examined the doctor as PW-2.
Considering the evidence of the doctor, considering
the injuries suffered by the claimant, I am of the
opinion that in addition to the compensation awarded
by the Tribunal, another Rs.30,000/- may be awarded
without 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.5,90,000/- as against Rs.5,60,000/- awarded
by the Tribunal.
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
HA/-
