Karnataka High Court
Reliance General Insurance Co. ... vs K. Prabhakhar S/O Subba Hegade on 8 June, 2022
Bench: Krishna S.Dixitpresided Byksdj
-1-
MFA NO.22430/2010
C/w. MFA NO.22483/2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 08TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT
M.F.A. NO.22430 OF 2010 (MV-I)
C/W. M.F.A. NO.22483 OF 2010 (MV-I)
IN MFA NO.22430/2010:
BETWEEN:
THE BRANCH MANGER,
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
CIS NO.472-474, KALBURGI SQUARE,
DESAI CIRCLE, DESHPANDE NAGAR,
HUBLI-580 029, DHARWAD DISTRICT.
... APPELLANT
(BY SHRI NAGARAJ C.KOLLOORI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. K. PRABHAKHAR S/O. SUBBA HEGADE,
AGE 44 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: KHB COLONY, PRABHAT NAGAR,
TQ: HONNAVAR, DIST: KARWAR.
2. IRAPPA MALLIKARJUN MADDIYAVAR,
AGE 46 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: COURT ROAD, KALAGATAGI,
Digitally
TQ: KALAGATAGI, DIST.: DHARWAD.
signed by J
MAMATHA
Location:
J
MAMATHA DHARWAD
Date:
... RESPONDENTS
2022.06.10
11:51:51
+0530
(RESPONDENT NO.1 - SERVED;
SHRI NAGARAJ C.KOLLOORI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF M.V. ACT, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 19.04.2010, PASSED IN
-2-
MFA NO.22430/2010
C/w. MFA NO.22483/2010
MVC NO.163/2008, ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, ADDL.
MACT, HONAVAR, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF
RS.3,17,500/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A. ON
THE AMOUNT OF RS.3,02,500/- FROM THE DATE OF
PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
IN MFA NO.22483/2010:
BETWEEN:
K. PRABHAKHAR S/O. SUBBA HEGADE,
AGE 44 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: KHB COLONY, PRABHAT NAGAR,
TQ: HONNAVAR, DIST: KARWAR.
... APPELLANT
(BY SHRI NAGARAJ C.KOLLOORI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. IRAPPA MADDIYAVAR S/o. MALLIKARJUN,
AGE 46 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: COURT ROAD, KALAGATAGI,
TQ: KALAGATAGI, DIST.: DHARWAD.
2. THE BRANCH MANGER,
RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
CIS NO.472-474, KALBURGI SQUARE,
DESAI CIRCLE, DESHPANDE NAGAR,
HUBLI-580 029, DHARWAD DISTRICT.
... RESPONDENTS
(RESPONDENT NO.1 - SERVED;
SHRI NAGARAJ C.KOLLOORI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF M.V. ACT, AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 19.04.2010, PASSED IN
MVC NO.163/2008, ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, ADDL.
MACT, HONAVAR, ALLOWING THE PETITION FRO
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING,
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-3-
MFA NO.22430/2010
C/w. MFA NO.22483/2010
JUDGMENT
1. Appeal by the Insurer in MFA No.22430/2010
and the appeal by the claimant in MFA No.22483/2010
seek to lay a challenge to the same Judgment & Award
dated 19.04.2010 rendered by the Additional MACT,
Honnavar, whereby the claim in MVC No.163/2008
having been favoured, a compensation of Rs.3,17,500/-
with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. subject to the usual
condition of Bank deposit has been awarded. The Insurer
argues that the award is on the higher side, whereas the
claimant grieves that it is on the lower side.
2. Brief facts:
(a) In a vehicular accident that happened on
25.06.2008 at around 6:15 in the evening, the claimant
sustained grievous injuries for which he was
hospitalized. Alleging rash and negligent driving on the
part of the offending Maruti Omni bearing Registration
No.KA-47/M-125 as being the cause of accident, he had
preferred the subject claim petition, which was stoutly
resisted by the insurer by filing the Written Statement.
MFA NO.22430/2010
C/w. MFA NO.22483/2010
(b) To prove the claim, the claimant was examined as
PW2 and other persons as PW1, PW3, PW4 & PW5. Dr.
S.Adyantaya, who had treated the injured claimant was
examined as PW6. From the side of two claimants as
many as 194 documents came to be marked as per
Exhibits P1 to P194, which comprised of Police Papers,
Hospital Records, Income Tax Returns and the like. From
the side of the respondent-Insurer, none was examined
nor any documents came to be produced.
(c) The MACT having considered the pleadings of
parties and having weighed the evidentiary materials on
record has entered the impugned Judgment & Award
that are put in challenge by both the sides.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the
parties and having perused the original TCR, this Court
declines to grant indulgence in the appeal of the insurer
and grants a limited indulgence in the appeal of the
claimant as under and for the following reasons:
MFA NO.22430/2010
C/w. MFA NO.22483/2010
(i) The happening of the accident with the
involvement of the offending vehicle in question because
of rash & negligent driving and consequent grievous
injuries sustained by the claimant are specifically
established by the evidentiary materials on record, which
the MACT in its accumulated wisdom has acted keeping
in view of the pleadings of the parties. Therefore, this
Court need not spend much time with regard to this
aspect of the matter.
(ii) Learned Panel Counsel appearing for the Insurer
vehemently argues that no compensation could have
been awarded towards loss of future prospects inasmuch
as for the subsequent financial years in question, the
Income Tax Returns were filed and they did not support
the alleged loss, which the claimant had allegedly
suffered post-accident. Per contra, learned counsel
appearing for the claimant contends that the loss of
future prospects has to be viewed as a potential loss and
what has actually happened for one or two years
following the accident does not much matter. This Court
MFA NO.22430/2010
C/w. MFA NO.22483/2010
sees much light in this submission of learned counsel for
the claimant. Therefore, the submission of the Insurer as
to impugned award being on the higher side falls to the
ground.
(iii) The above having been said, now I have to treat
the claim for enhancement of compensation. The
claimant having sustained grievous injuries was
hospitalized for a period of 43 days, is not in dispute;
therefore, the laid up period approximately would be
about 60 days inasmuch as immediately after discharge
from the hospital one does not go to the work place.
Therefore, the agony that the claimant had undergone
during his long hospitalization and for some days
thereafter post discharge cannot be lost sight of as
rightly contended by his counsel. For pain & suffering,
the MACT has awarded a lesser amount of Rs.40,000/-
when it ought to have been Rs.60,000/- in all justness.
For laid up period of two months, compensation has to
be fixed at Rs.20,000/-. For the loss of amenities, the
MACT has awarded a sum of Rs.15,000/-, when it ought
MFA NO.22430/2010
C/w. MFA NO.22483/2010
to have been Rs.25,000/- to say the least. No interest
would accrue on the future medical expenses.
In the above circumstances, the appeal of the
insurer fails and the appeal of claimant succeeds in part.
The MACT award having been modified, the
compensation awarded in a sum of Rs.3,17,500/- has
been enhanced to Rs.3,67,500/- (Rupees three lakh
sixty seven thousand five hundred) only. All other terms
and conditions of the award having been left intact..
The amount in deposit be transmitted to the MACT
.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Vnp*
