Karnataka High Court
Smt. Huchamma vs Y.N Ramesh Reddy on 30 June, 2022
Bench: Anant Ramanath Hegde
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
MFA NO.2156 OF 2014(MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SMT. HUCHAMMA
W/O.KARIYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS,
R/AT SOLUR, SOLUR HOBLI,
MAGADI TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
ALSO R/AT C/O.ANJANAPPA,
NEAR BANASHANKARI TEMPLE,
BANASHANKARI,
BANGALORE-560078.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.KALYAN.R, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. Y.N RAMESH REDDY
S/O.R.NARAYANASWAMY,
AGED MAJOR,
R/AT ENIGADALE VILLAGE,
CHINTAMANI TALUK,
CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
D.O-2, NO.64, LAL BAGH ROAD,
BANGALORE-27.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.M.C.JAYAKIRTHI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. JANARDHAN REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-2-
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.01.2014
PASSED IN MVC NO.7009/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE XIX
ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE, MACT, BANGALORE,
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
Heard the learned advocate appearing for the appellant-
claimant and the learned advocate appearing for the
respondent-insurance company.
2. The claimant in MVC No.7009/2014 has
questioned the judgment and award dated 17.01.2014 passed
by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore and she is
seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the
Tribunal as her claim petition filed seeking compensation of
Rs.15,00,000/- is allowed in part awarding compensation of
Rs.3,19,500/- along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of
petition till realization.
3. The insurer has admitted the liability and has not
questioned the impugned judgment and award. The only
question that requires to be considered is; Whether the
claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation? The claimant
has suffered grievous injuries and consequently, her right leg
was amputated below the knee. The claimant was aged 55
years at the time of the accident as per the reasoned finding
of the tribunal. She was working as a coolie. The Tribunal
has taken into consideration the income of the claimant at
Rs.5,000/- per month in the absence of proof and awarded
compensation under various heads as follows:
Sl.No. Particulars Amount (Rs.)
1 Towards pain and agony 45,000-00
2 Towards inpatient 1,500-00
3 Towards medical expenses 50,000-00
4 Towards loss of income 25,000-00
5 Towards disability 1,98,000
Total 3,19,500-00
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant-
claimant would submit that Tribunal erred in awarding lower
compensation and the income of the claimant should have
been taken at Rs.7,000/- per month and no compensation is
awarded under the head of 'loss of income during laid up
period' and 'loss of amenities'. It is also submitted by the
learned counsel for the appellant-claimant that the claimant is
using an artificial limb and she has incurred an expenditure of
Rs.1,03,000/- towards an artificial limb and the same has not
been awarded by the Tribunal.
5. Learned counsel for the insurance company
submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is
just and proper and there is no scope for any enhancement
and compensation awarded is based on the material produced
on record.
6. This Court has considered the rival contentions
and also perused the lower court records. There is no dispute
over the fact that the appellant-claimant suffered an injury
and her leg was amputated below the knee. The claimant
was inpatient for 5 days. Since the accident took place in the
year 2012, the Tribunal should have taken the income at
Rs.7,000/- per month. However, the income of the claimant
was taken at Rs.5,000/- per month and disability was
assessed at 30% by the Tribunal. The doctor has been
examined as P.W.2. The doctor who has examined the
claimant has stated in his evidence that disability to the limb
is 25% and disability to the total body is 30%. The claimant
was working as a coolie and since her leg was amputated, it
can be safely concluded that there is functional disability.
The tribunal has considered the functional disability at 30%.
The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that 50%
functional disability is to be taken into consideration for
assessing loss of income. Since, the claimant's leg below
knee is amputed, there is no difficulty in accepting the
claimant's contention to assess the functional disability at
50%. Hence, 'loss of future income is calculated as under:
Rs.7,000/- X 12 X 11 X 50% = Rs.4,62,000/-
7. The tribunal has awarded a compensation of
Rs.45,000/- under the head of 'pain and suffering'.
Considering the fact that the claimant has lost her leg and got
amputated below the knee and she has to be under the
support of an artificial limb for the rest of her life,
compensation under the head 'pain and suffering' is enhanced
to Rs.1,00,000/- from Rs.45,000/-.
8. Tribunal has awarded a compensation of
Rs.50,000/- under the head's medical expenses, which is just
and proper and there is no need to interfere with the said
award. However, it is noticed from Ex.P-7 that doctor has
given an estimate relating to the artificial limb and according
to the doctor the cost of the artificial limb is Rs.1,03,000/-
and this Court deems it appropriate to award a compensation
of Rs.50,000/- under the head 'future medical expenses.
9. It is noticed that no compensation is awarded
under the head 'loss of income during laid up period'. Going
by the nature of injuries it can be concluded that the claimant
was indisposed for 5 months. Thus, the compensation under
the said head would be Rs.7,000/- per month for 3 months
(Rs.7,000/-X5=Rs.35,000/-). Accordingly, a sum of
Rs.35,000/- is awarded under the head 'loss of income during
the laid-up period'.
10. It is noticed from the impugned judgment that
Tribunal has not awarded anything towards 'loss of amenities'.
Since the claimant's right leg is amputated below the knee,
she will be handicapped for the rest of her life and she has to
depend on others for several activities she will be put to
inconvenience and discomfort for the rest of her life. Under
these circumstances, compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- is
awarded under the head 'loss of amenities'.
Thus, the claimant would be entitled to total compensation as
under:
Sl. Particulars Amount (Rs)
No.
1 Loss of future income 4,62,000-00
2 Pain and sufferings 1,00,000-00
3 Medical expenses 50,000-00
4 Future medical expenses 50,000-00
5 Loss of income during the laid-up 35,000-00
period
6 Loss of amenities 1,00,000-00
Total 7,97,000-00
LESS: Awarded by the tribunal 3,19,500.00
Enhanced compensation 4,77,500.00
11. Hence, the following:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) Impugned judgment and award dated 17.01.2014
passed in MVC No.7009/2014 by the Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Bangalore, is modified
(iii) Appellant is entitled for enhanced compensation of
Rs.4,77,500/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of
petition till the date of realization. The insurer shall deposit
the enhanced amount within 8 weeks from the date of receipt
of certified copy of this order.
(iv) In all other aspects, the award of the tribunal stands.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DR
