M Channegowda vs Prakash
2022 Latest Caselaw 9370 Kant

                            1




  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                        BEFORE

  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

            M.F.A.NO.2871 OF 2014 (MV-I)

BETWEEN:

M CHANNEGOWDA,
S/O CHIKKAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
R/AT 2ND CROSS, GUTHAL COLONY,
MANDYA CITY-571401.                         ...APPELLANT

(BY SMT.BHUSHANI KUMAR, ADV.)

AND:

  1. PRAKASH,
     S/O RAJEGOWDA,
     MAJOR IN AGE,
     R/AT MALAGARANAHALLY,
     MADDUR TALUK,
     MANDYA DISTRICT-571428.

  2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
     UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
     NO.1119/B, M C ROAD,
     MANDYA-571401.                       ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI JANARDHAN REDDY, ADV. FOR R2,
 V/O/DTD: 14.12.2016, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED)
                         ----
      THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173 (1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.01.2014 PASSED IN MVC
NO.366/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE, & CJM, MACT, MANDYA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
                                       2




PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.

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


                              JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the claimant seeking

enhancement of compensation challenging the judgment

and award dated 04.01.2014 in MVC No.366/2012 passed

by the Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Mandya.

2. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred

as per their ranks before the Tribunal.

3. Heard learned advocate for the appellant and

learned advocate for the respondent No.2. Issuance of

notice to respondent No.1 is dispensed with vide order

dated 14.12.2016 as there is no liability on the

owner/respondent No.1.

4. There is no dispute over the fact that the accident

has taken place on 07.04.2011 when the claimant was

riding motor cycle bearing Regn.No.KA-11/K-1499 towards

the factory in Industrial Area, Gejjalagere at 3.00 PM, a

goods auto bearing Regn.No.KA-11/8584 being driven

rashly and negligently from Maddur side dashed the

claimant on account of which he sustained injuries. It is

forthcoming from the records that the claimant was in-

patient for a period of 25 days and he has suffered the

following injuries :-

i) Laceration at lateral angle of right eye and upper lateral part of right cheek about 3 1/2 inch long and bone deep.

ii) Lacerated wound over right knee about 4 1/2 inch long muscle deep.

iii) Pain in light shoulder joint.

iv) Undisplaced fracture of distal radius of right side.

v) Auounio clavicular joint displacement (R).

Though the claimant has produced the disability certificate

which reveals that he has suffered 34% of the disability,

the Tribunal has not accepted the certificate on the ground

that the doctor who treated the claimant has examined the

claimant 2 /2 years after the accident.

5. The Tribunal has allowed the claim petition in

part and awarded compensation of Rs.15,000/- along with

interest at the rate of 9% per annum.

6. The appellant being aggrieved has preferred this

appeal seeking enhancement.

7. This Court considered the contentions raised by

the learned advocate for the appellant and respondent

No.2/insurance company and perused the records. It is

forthcoming from the records that the claimant has

suffered fracture and he has taken treatment as in-patient

for a period of 25 days and at the time of accident he was

aged 30 years.

8. There is no proof in respect of the income of the

claimant. However as per the chart prepared by the

Karnataka State Legal Service Authority, the notional

income of the claimant has to be taken at Rs.6500/- per

month, for the accident which occurred in 2011. On

considering the nature of injuries sustained by the

claimant and the period of his hospitalization, this Court is

of the opinion that the claimant is entitled to compensation

of Rs.30,000/- under the head of pain and suffering,

Rs.20,000/- under the head of loss of income during the

laid-up period and Rs.10,000/- is a towards loss of

amenities. However, the tribunal has awarded global

compensation of Rs.15,000/- only.

9. The claimant is entitled to enhanced

compensation of Rs.45,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded

interest @ 9% p.a. Though no appeal is filed by the

insurance company, this Court is of the opinion that 6%

p.a. interest is to be awarded on the total compensation

amount.

10. Hence, the following :-

ORDER

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

and award dated 04.01.2014 passed by the Additional

Senior Civil Judge and MACT in MVC No.366/2012 is

modified.

(ii) The appellant/claimant is entitled to

compensation of Rs.60,000/- (Rs.45,000/- enhanced

compensation + Rs.15,000/- awarded by the tribunal)

along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of the

petition till realisation.

(iii) The respondent No.1/insurance company shall

deposit the amount after deducting the amount, if any,

already paid within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of

copy of this order.

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

undisturbed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

HD