Puttabuddinaika @ ... vs Fakeergowda
2022 Latest Caselaw 9033 Kant

                              1




  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                           BEFORE

  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

            M.F.A.NO.5060 OF 2016 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

PUTTABUDDINAIKA @ PUTTAMUDDANAIKA,
S/O SANNAMADANAIKA,
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/A GONAHALLI VILLAGE,
BILIGERE HOBLI,
NANJANGUD TALUK - 571301,
MYSURU DISTRICT.                           ...APPELLANT

(BY SRI P MAHESHA, ADV.)

AND:

  1. FAKEERGOWDA,
     S/O VEERABADREGOWDA,
     AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
     K S R T C BUS DRIVER,
     R/AT CHAMALAPURA STREET,
     NANJANGUD TALUK - 571301,
     MYSORE.

  2. DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER,
     CHAMRAJANAGAR BUS DEPOT,
     CHAMRAJANAGAR DISTRICT - 571313.     ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. H.R.RENUKA, ADV. FOR R2,
 R1 - SERVED)
                             ----
       THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 24.07.2015
PASSED IN MVC NO.63/14 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL
                                2




JUDGE, JMFC, MACT, NANJANGUD, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM  PETITION  FOR  COMPENSATION   AND  SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-

                          JUDGMENT

Though the matter is listed for admission, with the

consent of the learned counsel for the parties, it is taken

up for final disposal.

2. This appeal is filed by the claimant seeking

enhancement of compensation challenging the judgment

and award dated 24.07.2015 in MVC No.63/2014 passed

by the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Nanjangud.

3. For the sake of convenience, parties are

referred as per their rank before the Tribunal.

4. Heard the learned advocate for the appellant

and the learned advocate for respondents No.2. Though

notice was served on respondent No.1, he is

unrepresented.

5. There is no dispute over the fact that the

accident took place on 06.05.2013 when the claimant was

travelling in a KSRTC bus bearing Regn. No.KA-09-F-4025,

near Kriugunda Madahalli Road as the driver of the bus,

drove the same in a rash and negligent manner at high

speed and fell in the land belonging to Madanaika. The

claimant sustained injuries and he was admitted to

Government Hospital, Nanjangud thereafter he took

further treatment at K.R.Hospital, Mysuru as an inpatient

from 06.05.2013 to 18.05.2013. The claimant was an

agriculturist. The accident took place due to rash and

negligence on the part of the driver of the KSRTC Bus.

The claimant has sustained the following injuries:-

      (i)     Tenderness on the right knee.
      (ii)    Tenderness on the right hip joint.
      (iii)   Wound left mid-finger.
      (iv)    Tenderness on left forearm/wrist.

6. There is no dispute over the fact that the

claimant was aged 45 years at the time of the accident and

was an agriculturist. The claimant claimed compensation

of Rs.14,00,000/-. In the absence of proof relating to the

source of income, the Tribunal has awarded compensation

as under:-

           Pain and Suffering               Rs.40,000/-

           Medical Expenses                 Rs.15,000/-

Loss of earnings due to Rs.60,480/-

           disability
           Loss of Amenities       Rs.10,000/-

           Total                            Rs.1,25,480/-

           Rounded off                      Rs.1,26,000/-

7. The appellant being aggrieved has preferred

this appeal-seeking enhancement.

8. This Court has perused the records and also

compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The doctor PW-2 in

his evidence stated that the claimant has sustained injuries

on the right knee and tenderness on the left forearm/wrist.

Ex.P6 wound certificate and Exs.P-41 to 43 corroborate the

evidence of PW-2. The doctor in his evidence has opined

that the claimant sustained 28% disability. However, the

Tribunal has taken disability @ 8% and awarded

compensation which in the opinion of this Court needs

interference. Since two injuries are grievous, disability

should be taken at 10%.

9. Considering the nature of the injuries suffered

by the claimant, he is entitled to enhancement of

compensation under the head of loss of earnings. The

Tribunal has taken the income of the claimant at

Rs.4,500/- per month. In the absence of proof of any

documentary evidence regarding income, as per the chart

prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority,

since the accident is in the year 2013, notional income

has to be fixed @ Rs.8,000/- per month. Therefore, the

loss of earnings would be Rs.8000X12X14X10%=

Rs.1,34,400/- as against Rs.60,480/- awarded by the

Tribunal.

10. Looking to the nature of the injuries, this Court

is of the opinion that under the head of pain and suffering,

the claimant is entitled to Rs.50,000/- as against

Rs.40,000/-,

11. As regards medical expenses of Rs.15,000/-

awarded by the Tribunal, is just and proper and does not

require interference.

12. Under the head of loss of amenities, the same

is to be enhanced to Rs.20,000/- as against Rs.10,000/-

and the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation for

loss of earnings during the laid-up period. This Court is of

opinion that as the claimant's monthly income is taken at

Rs.8,000/- per month. Loss of earnings during the laid-up

period of three months is to be awarded at Rs.24,000/-

and no compensation is awarded by the Tribunal under the

head of incidental, attendant etc., On considering the

nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, under the said

head, Rs.8000/- is awarded under this head.

13. It is also to be noted that the appellant has

filed the instant appeal after the lapse of 272 days. The

application was filed to condone the delay in filing the

appeal. This Court had allowed the application on the

condition that the appellant will not be entitled to interest

for the delayed period in the event of enhancement. The

appellant is entitled to the interest from the date of deposit

till the date of actual payment excluding the delayed

period of 272 days referred to above.

14. The claimant is entitled to enhanced

compensation as under:-

     Sl.No.       Heads                        Amount      in
                                               Rs.
     1            Pain and sufferings          50,000/-

     2            Medical Expenses             15,000/-

     3            Loss of earnings due to 1,34,400/-
                  disability
     4            Loss of amenities       20,000/-

     5            Loss of earnings during 24,000/-
                  the laid-up period
     6            Incidental,      attendant 8,000/-
                  charges
                  Total                      2,51,400/-





      15. Hence, the following:-

                               ORDER

      (i)     Appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment

and award dated 24.07.2015 passed by the Senior Civil                 Judge

and MACT, Nanjangud in MVC No.63/2014 is modified.

(ii) The appellant/claimant is entitled to

compensation of Rs.2,51,400/- along with interest @ 6%

p.a. from the date of the petition till realisation excluding

the interest for 272 days.

(iii) The respondents/insurance company shall deposit

the amount after deducting the amount, if any,

already paid.

(iv) In all other aspects, the award of the Tribunal is

undisturbed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

HD