Karnataka High Court
Sri Suresh Kumar vs The United India Insurance ... on 10 June, 2022
Bench: H T Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MFA No.6658 OF 2021(MV)
BETWEEN:
SRI SURESH KUMAR
S/O P P GOPALAPPA
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
R/O RANGAPPANAPALY
SIRA TALUK-572137
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.V B SIDDARAMAIAH, ADV.)
AND
1. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
1ST FLOOR, RAJA COMPLEX
DR AMBEDKAR ROAD, SIRA TOWN
TUMAKURU DITRICT-572137
REP BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
2. SRI JAGADEESH
S/O RANGANATHAPPA
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS
R/O MANANGI AT POST, SIRA TOWN
TUMAKURU DISTRICT-572137.
...RESPONDENTS
2
(BY SRI.B A RAMAKRISHNA, ADV. FOR R1:
NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA FILED UNDER SECTION.173(1) OF MV
ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DT.01.02.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.39/2015 ON THE
FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ADDITIONAL
MACT, JMFC, SIRA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSIONS, 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 01.02.2019 passed
by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Sira in MVC
No.39/2015.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal
briefly stated are that on 30.01.2014 at about 03.30
P.M. when the claimant and his friend were walking on
the left side of the Panjiganahalli road to go to
Panjiganahalli, at that time, the rider of the Hero
Honda Motorcycle bearing Registration No.KA-06-EH-
1135 came from Panjiganahalli Gate and dashed to
the claimant from the back side. 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 No.2
being the insurer of the offending vehicle has
appeared through counsel and 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. It was further pleaded
that the accident was not due to negligence on the
part of the rider of the motorcycle and only negligence
on the part of claimant. The driver of the offending
vehicle did not have valid driving licence as on the
date of the accident. The liability is subject to terms
and conditions of the policy. 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.
The respondent No.1 did not appear before the
Tribunal inspite of service of notice and was placed
ex-parte.
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 another witness was examined
as PW-2 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1
to Ex.P15. On behalf of the respondents, one witness
was examined as RW-1 and got exhibited documents
namely Ex.R1 to Ex.R7. 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.75,000./- 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. Sri V. B. Siddaramaiah, learned counsel for
the claimant has contended that due to the accident,
the claimant has suffered grievous injuries. He was
inpatient in the hospital for a period of 2 days and he
has spent Rs.2,00,000/- for medicines and other
incidental charges. The total compensation of
Rs.75,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is on lower side.
Hence, he sought for enhancement of compensation.
7. Per contra, Sri B. A. Ramakrishna, the
learned counsel for the Insurance Company has
contended that the injuries suffered by the claimant
are minor in nature. He was inpatient in the hospital
only for a period of 2 days. He has not examined the
doctor. Considering the injuries suffered by the
claimant and the age and avocation of the claimant,
the total compensation of Rs.75,000/- with 6%
interest awarded by the Tribunal is just and
reasonable. 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.
Due to the accident, the claimant has sustained
grievous injuries. He was inpatient in the hospital for a
period of 2 days. Considering the injuries suffered by
the claimant, considering the Wound Certificate and
his age and avocation, I am of the opinion that in
addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
Rs.75,000/-, another Rs.30,000/- is granted without
any 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.1,05,000/-.
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 excluding
interest for the compensation of Rs.30,000/- granted
by this Court.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HA/-
