Karnataka High Court
Shankarappa vs S.N . Prakash on 23 June, 2022
Bench: H T Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MFA No.3208 OF 2019(MV)
BETWEEN
SHANKARAPPA
S/O SHIVANANJAPPA
AGE 54 YEARS
AGRICULTURIST
R/O NEAR RAILWAY STATION ROAD
DEVANOOR VILLAGE
KADUR TALUK PIN-577548
CHIKKAMAGALURU DIST
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. B.N. MANJULA, ADV. FOR
SRI.NAGARAJA R C., ADV.)
AND
1 . S.N . PRAKASH
S/O NARAYANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS
R/O BANAVARA ROAD
SAKHARAYAPATTANA
KADUR TALUK PIN:577548
CHIKKAMAGALURU DIST.
2 . K S PRAKASH
S/O SIDDAPPA
2
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
R/O ASHWATHANAGARA
KADUR TOWN PIN-577548
CHIKKAMAGALURU DIST.
3 . THE NATIONAL INSURANCE
COMPANY BHADRAVATHI TOWN
SHIVAMOGGA DIST-577301
REP BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. H.S.LINGARAJ, ADV. FOR R3:
NOTICE TO R1 & R2 IS DISPENSED WITH )
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF
MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED:03.10.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.125/2012 ON
THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MMACT,
KADUR, CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT, 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
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 dated 3.10.2018 passed by MACT,
Kadur in MVC 125/2012.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal
briefly stated are that on 14.3.2012 when the
claimant was going by walk on the left side of the road
from Devanoor Railway station along with one Lokesh,
at that time, motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-
18-V-1953 being ridden by its rider at a high speed
and in a rash and negligent manner, dashed to the
vehicle of the claimant. 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 driving of the offending vehicle by
its driver.
4. On service of notice, the respondents
appeared through their respective counsel and only
respondent No.3 filed written statement in which the
averments made in the petition were denied.
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 Dr.A.C.Niyath was examined
through court commissioner as CW-1 and got
exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P63 and
Ex.C-1 to 3. On behalf of the respondents, one
witness was examined as RW-1 and got exhibited
documents namely Ex.R1 to Ex.R10. The Claims
Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held
that the accident took place on account of rash and
negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver,
as a result of which, the claimant sustained injuries.
The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled
to a compensation of Rs.238,153/- along with interest
at the rate of 7% p.a. and directed the Insurance
Company to deposit the compensation amount along
with interest. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been
filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimant has
contended that claimant was aged about 47 years at
the time of the accident and earning Rs.7,500/- p.m.
by doing agricultural work. As per wound certificate,
he has sustained grievous injuries. He has sustained
fracture to left leg and was inserted with rod. CW-1,
the doctor has stated in his evidence that his left leg is
shortened by 1/2 cm and has deposed disability of
20% to left leg and 10% physical disability. Due to the
accident, the claimant has sustained grievous injuries.
He was treated as inpatient for a period of 11 days.
Even after discharge from the hospital, he was not in
a position to discharge his regular work. He has
suffered lot of pain during treatment. He has produced
medial bills at Ex.P8-55. Considering the nature of
injuries, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
towards 'loss of income during laid-up period', 'pain
and sufferings' and other incidental expenses are on
the lower side. Further, the Tribunal has not awarded
any compensation for 'loss of amenities'. Even though
the doctor has stated that the claimant requires
Rs.20,000/- for 'future medical expenses', the
Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards
'future medical expenses'. Hence, he sought for
allowing the appeal.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for
the Insurance Company has contended that the
injuries sustained by the claimant are minor in nature.
The claimant himself has admitted that he was
earning Rs.7,500/- p.m. and hence, the Tribunal has
rightly taken the said income. As per the evidence of
the doctor, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the
whole body disability at 10%. Further, the claimant
has not produced any documents to show that he has
undergone surgery or further treatment. Therefore,
the Tribunal has rightly not awarded any
compensation for 'future medical expenses'.
Considering the age and avocation of the claimant, the
Tribunal has granted just and reasonable
compensation and it does not call for interference.
The interest awarded by the Tribunal at 7% p.a. on
the compensation amount is on the higher side.
Hence, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties
and perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.
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.
The claimant himself has admitted that he was
earning Rs.7,500/- p.m. and hence, the Tribunal has
rightly assessed the said income. As per wound
certificate, the claimant has sustained grievous
injuries. He has sustained fracture to left leg and was
inserted with rod. CW-1, the doctor has stated in his
evidence that his left leg is shortened by 1/2 cm and
has deposed disability of 20% to left leg and 10%
physical disability. As per the evidence of the doctor,
the Tribunal has rightly assessed the whole body
disability at 10%. Due to the accident, the claimant
has sustained grievous injuries. He was treated as
inpatient for a period of 11 days. Even after discharge
from the hospital, he was not in a position to
discharge his regular work. He has suffered lot of pain
during treatment. He has produced medial bills at
Ex.P8-55. The claimant has not produced any
documents either before the Tribunal or before this
Court to show that he has undergone surgery or
further treatment. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly
not awarded any compensation for 'future medical
expenses'.
Considering the age and avocation of the
claimant and considering the injuries sustained by the
claimant and evidence of the doctor, I am inclined to
award compensation of Rs.60,000/- in addition to
compensation of Rs.238,153/- awarded by the
Tribunal.
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.298,153/-.
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the compensation amount along with interest @ 7%
p.a. (enhanced amount shall carry interest at 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.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DM
