Karnataka High Court
N V Ashok vs K Srinivasa Murthy on 23 June, 2022
Bench: Anant Ramanath Hegde
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6316 OF 2010 (MV)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.7126 OF 2010 (MV)
In MFA No.6316/2010
BETWEEN:
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
CBO 13, NO.1188, 1ST FLOOR,
26TH MAIN, RAGIGUDDA TEMPLE MAIN
ROAD, 9TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 011.
NOW REPRESENTED BY ITS
REGIONAL MANAGER
ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
REGIONAL OFFICE, # 44/45, LEO
SHOPPING COMPLEX,RESIDENCY ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 025. ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.A.N.KRISHNA SWAMY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. N.V.ASHOK
S/O VENKATASWAMY
NOW AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
#1090, 8TH CROSS,
22ND MAIN SECTION 1, HSR LAYOUT,
BANGALORE.
2. K.SRINIVASA MURTHY
AGE : MAJOR,
NO.2, B TYPE NDR1 QUARTERS
ADUGODI, BANGALORE - 560 030. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.T.M.VENKATA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
R2-SERVED)
2
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.02.2010 PASSED IN MVC
NO.8340/2008 ON THE FILE OF XVI ADDITIONAL JUDGE,
MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE
AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.1,85,000/- WITH
INTEREST AT 6% FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL
REALISATION.
IN MFA NO.7126/2010
BETWEEN:
N.V.ASHOK
S/O V.VENKATA SWAMI
NOW AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
RESIDING AT 1090, 8TH CROSS,
22ND MAIN SECTOR-I, HSR LAYOUT,
BANGALORE. ..APPELLANT
(BY SRI.T.M.VENKATA REDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. K.SRINIVASA MURTHY
NO.2, B TYPE N.D.R.I QUARTERS
ADUGODI, BANGALORE - 560 030.
2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.
CBO 13, NO.1188, 1ST FLOOR,
26TH MAIN, RAGIGUDDA TEMPLE MAIN,
ROAD, 9TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 069. ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.A.N.KRISHNA SWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R2;R1-SERVED)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.02.2010 PASSED IN MVC
NO.8340/2008 ON THE FILE OF XVI ADDITIONAL JUDGE,
MEMBER, MACT, BANGALORE CITY PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
THE COURT, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
JUDGMENT
In MFA No.6316/2010.
Heard Sri.A.N.Krishnaswamy, learned counsel for the
appellant/insurer and Sri.T.M.Venkatesh Reddy, learned
counsel appearing for respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 is
served and unrespresented.
In MFA No.7126/2010
Heard Sri.T.M.Venkatesh Reddy, learned counsel
appearing for the appellant and Sri.A.N.Krishnaswamy,
learned counsel for the respondent No.2. Respondent No.1
is served and unrepresented.
2. Both these appeals are arising out of the
judgment and award dated 26.02.2010 passed in MVC
No.8340/2008 on the file of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Bengaluru (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal').
3. The claim petition filed by the petitioner seeking
compensation in respect of the injuries sustained by him in
motor vehicle accident which occurred on 26.08.2008 was
allowed in part awarding a compensation of Rs.1,85,000/-
along with interest at 6% p.a. The insurer is
questioning the quantum by filing an appeal in MFA
No.6316/2010. The claimant has also filed appeal in MFA
No.7126/2010 seeking enhancement of the compensation.
4. Sri.A.N.Krishnaswamy, learned counsel
appearing for the appellant reiterating the grounds urged in
the appeal memo has also invited the attention of the Court
to the fact that Rs.69,402/- is claimed by the claimant
towards the reimbursement of medical expenses from his
insurance TTK Health Care. Learned counsel for the
appellant would submit that since he has already received
Rs.69,402/- from the TTK Health Care the medical insurer
of the claimant the award of compensation by the Tribunal
under the same head is impermissible.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant would also
submit that the judgment relied upon by the Tribunal would
support the award of compensation of Rs.69,402/- under
the head 'medical expenses'. However, said judgment later
is held to be incorrect preposition of law in the
judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in
the case of New India Assurance Company Limited,
Bangalore v. Manish Gupta and another reported in
2013(1) KLJ 2013 624 . This court has considered the
contention and perused the aforementioned judgment. The
Division Bench of this Court, on reference has taken a view
that the judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge by
this Court reported in the case of Shaheed Ahmed v.
Shankaranarayana Bhat and another reported in ILR
2008 KAR 3277 is incorrect preposition of law, as such,
the award for Rs.69,402/- under the head of medical
expenses is impermissible. It is also forthcoming from the
record that the claimant has incurred the expenditure of
Rs.82,224/- towards medical expenses and deducting
Rs.69,402/- which is already reimbursed to the claimant
under the medical policy, the claimant is entitled to
Rs.12,822/- under the head 'medical expenses'.
6. As far as the submission relating to deduction of
compensation on other heads, this Court finds that there is
no justifiable reason to reduce the compensation as urged
by the learned counsel for the appellant.
7. Learned counsel for the claimant submits that
the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under all other
heads are also on lower side and claimant is entitled for
higher compensation under each of the heads awarded by
the Tribunal.
8. The learned counsel for the insurer would
submit that the award of compensation under all other
heads is just and proper.
9. This Court has considered the evidence on
record as well as this Court has considered the submission
made by the learned counsel for the appellant and learned
counsel for the insurer. The claimant in support of his claim
relating to injury has produced wound certificate at Ex.P7,
discharge summary at Ex.P8 and salary certificate at
Ex.P9. The wound certificate at Ex.P7 would reveal that the
claimant has suffered the following injury:
'Closed fracture both bones left leg middle third'
It is also forthcoming from the records that the
petitioner has undergone surgery. The discharge summary
would also indicate that he was advised home care
dressing, suture removal, strict non weight bearing
crutch/walker walking till further advice and to do knee
bending and strengthening exercises as taught and to take
regular medications. The Doctor has examined the
claimant and issued disability certificate assessing the
disability at 12% to the whole body and 36% to the right
lower limb. Considering the nature of the injuries and
disability as well as the age and avocation of the claimant,
this Court is of the view that the compensation under the
head of Pain and Suffering is to be enhanced to Rs.60,000/-
as against Rs.40,000/- awarded by the tribunal.
10. Compensation under the head of Conveyance,
nourishment and attendant charges and diet is to be
enhanced by Rs.15,000/- as against Rs.10,000/- awarded
by the tribunal.
11. It is also noticed that the doctor has opined that
Rs.20,000/- is required towards future medical expenses.
Tribunal has awarded Rs.15,000/- and compensation under
the head of future medical expenses is enhanced by
Rs.5,000/-.
It is noticed that the tribunal has awarded
Rs.27,000/- towards loss of income during the treatment
period. The salary certificate of the claimant would show
that he was earning Rs.27,000/- per month as salary.
Same needs no interference by this Court. It is also noticed
that the Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- towards loss of
amenities and same needs no interference by this Court.
12. Accordingly, the amount awarded by the
Tribunal under the heads "medical expenses", "loss of
income during treatment period", "loss of amenities" is just
and proper and it does not call for interference.
13. Under the head "medical Expenses"
Rs.83,000/- is awarded. However, Rs.69,402/- has already
been reimbursed by the TTK Health Care. Thus, claimant
is entitled to only Rs.12,822/- under the above said head.
Accordingly, the compensation awarded to the
claimant under the following heads is enhanced, and the
details are as under:-
Sl.No. Heads of Description Compensation
enhanced by this
Court (Rs.)
1. Pain and suffering 20,000/-
2. Conveyance, 15,000/-
nourishment, attendant
charges & diet
3. Future surgery 5,000/-
expenses
TOTAL 40,000/-
The table showing amount awarded under different
heads after modification is as under:
Sl.No. Heads of Compensation Compensation
awarded by awarded by
Description Tribunal (RS.) this Court in
Rs.
1. Pain and suffering 40,000/- 60,000/-
2. Loss of income 27,000/- 27,000/-
during treatment
period
3. Medical expenses 83,000/- 12,822/-
4. Loss of amenities 20,000/- 20,000/-
5. Conveyance, 10,000/- 25,000/-
nourishment,
attendant charges
& diet
6. Future surgery 15,000/- 20,000/-
expenses
TOTAL 1,95,000 1,64,822/-
(wrongly shown as
Rs.1,85,000/- by
the Tribunal)
11. Hence, the following:
ORDER
(i) MFA No.6316/2010 is allowed-in-part. MFA
No.7126/2010 is allowed-in-part. The impugned judgment
and award dated 26.02.2010 passed by the Motor Vehicles
Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru in MVC No.8340/2008
is modified.
(ii) The claimant is entitled to compensation of
Rs.1,64,822/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of
petition till payment.
(iii) The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to
the jurisdictional tribunal.
(iv) The insurer shall deposit the amount within a
period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE
UN/BRN
