Karnataka High Court

V Raghu Ram vs The Managing Director on 24 June, 2022

Bench: Anant Ramanath Hegde

                             1




  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE, 2022

                        BEFORE

  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

           M.F.A.NO.5865 OF 2014 (MV-I)
                       C/W
           M.F.A.NO.5866 OF 2014 (MV-I)
           M.F.A.NO.5867 OF 2014 (MV-D)
           M.F.A.NO.5868 OF 2014 (MV-I)

IN M.F.A.NO.5865/2014:

BETWEEN:

V RAGHU RAM,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
S/O V VASUDEVAN POTTI,
R/AT C/O MR. T.V. RAO,
AMMA TEMPLE ROAD,
AMBALAPADY,
UDUPI TALUK & DIST-576101.               ...APPELLANT

(MEMO FOR RETIREMENT FILED BY
 SRI S.D.N PRASAD, ADV. IS ACCEPTED
 SRI V RAGHURAM - APPELLANT ABSENT)

AND:

  1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
     V.R.L. LOGISTICS, HUBLI-580020.

  2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE
     COMPANY LTD.,
     HUBLI,REPRESENTED BY THE NEAREST,
     DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
     KRISHNA COMPLEX,
     G.B.PANTH ROAD,
                             2




       OPP. SHANKAR VITTAL GARAGE,
       UDUPI-576101,REPRESENTED BY ITS
       BRANCH MANAGER.                     ...RESPONDENTS

(NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED V/O/DT: 27.01.2015,
 SRI RAVISH BENNI, ADV. FOR R2)
                            -----
      THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173 (1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.12.2013 PASSED IN MVC
NO.232/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MACT, UDUPI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM   PETITION    FOR   COMPENSATION     AND    SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

IN M.F.A.NO.5866/2014:

BETWEEN:

BABY SHIVANSHI,
AGED ABOUT 1 ½ YEARS,
D/O RAGHURAM,
R/O AMBALAPADY,
UDUPI TALUK & DIST-576101,
SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED
BY HER MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN
SMT.VANI,W/O RAGHURAM.                   ...APPELLANT

(MEMO FOR RETIREMENT FILED BY
 SRI S.D.N PRASAD, ADV. IS ACCEPTED
 BABY SHIVANSHI, APPELLANT MINOR REP.
 BY HER MOTHER SMT.VANI - ABSENT)

AND:

  1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
     V.R.L. LOGISTICS,
     HUBLI-580020.

  2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE
     COMPANY LTD,
     HUBLI,REPRESENTED BY THE NEAREST
     DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
     KRISHNA COMPLEX,
                             3




       G.B.PANTH ROAD,
       OPP. SHANKAR VITTAL GARAGE,
       UDUPI-576101, REPRESENTED BY ITS
       BRANCH MANAGER.                    ...RESPONDENTS

(NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED,
 SRI RAVISH BENNI, ADV. FOR R2 )
                        ----
      THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173 (1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.12.2013 PASSED IN MVC
NO.233/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, AT UDUPI, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

IN M.F.A.NO.5867/2014:

BETWEEN:

SMT SHASHIKALA,
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
W/O RAMAKRISHNA,
R/AT KRISHNARJUNA,
VASUNDHARA NAGAR,
MALPE-ASHIRVAD ROAD,
KALIANOPURA,POST SANTHEKATTE,
UDUPI TALUK & DIST-576103.                 ...APPELLANT

(MEMO FOR RETIREMENT FILED BY
SRI S.D.N PRASAD, ADV. IS ACCEPTED
SMT SHASHIKALA - APPELLANT ABSENT)

AND:

  1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
     V.R.L. LOGISTICS, HUBLI-580020.

  2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
     HUBLI, REPRESENTED BY THE NEAREST
     DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
     KRISHNA COMPLEX,G.B. PANTH ROAD,
     OPP. SHANKAR VITAL GARAGE,
     UDUPI-576101,REPRESENTED BY ITS
                             4




       BRANCH MANAGER.                  ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI RAVISH BENNI, ADV. FOR R2,
 V/O/DT: 22.01.2015, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED)
                        ----
      THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173 (1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.12.2013 PASSED IN MVC
NO.234/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MACT, UDUPI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM    PETITION   FOR    COMPENSATION    AND    SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

IN M.F.A.NO.5868/2014:

BETWEEN:

RAMAKRISHNA,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
S/O SHANKARANARAYANA,
R/AT "KRISHNARJUNA",
VASUNDHARA NAGAR,
MALPE - ASHIRVAD ROAD,
KALIANOPURA, POST SANTHEKATTE,
UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT - 576103.          ...APPELLANT

(MEMO FOR RETIREMENT FILED BY
SRI S.D.N PRASAD, ADV. IS ACCEPTED
SRI RAMAKRISHNA, APPELLANT IS ABSENT)

AND:

  1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
     V.R.L. LOGISTICS, HUBLI-580020.

  2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
     HUBLI,REPRESENTED BY THE NEAREST
     DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
     KRISHNA COMPLEX,G.B. PANTH ROAD,
     OPP. SHANKAR VITTAL GARAGE,
     UDUPI-576101,REPRESENTED BY ITS
     BRANCH MANAGER.                  ...RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI RAVISH BENNI, ADV. FOR R2,
                                5




V/O/DT: 27.01.2015, NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED)

      THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173 (1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 19.12.2013 PASSED IN MVC
NO.235/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MACT, UDUPI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM   PETITION    FOR   COMPENSATION     AND    SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

     THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-


                        JUDGMENT

Though these appeals are listed separately in the

orders list, with the consent of the learned counsel

appearing for the parties, matters are taken up for hearing

and are disposed of by this common judgment as they

arise out of same accident.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that

he has issued notice to appellants in all the appeals

communicating the fact as he has no instructions,

therefore, he would retire from the cases. Notice of

retirement is served on the appellants. Appellants have

not turned up.

3. Learned advocate Sri S D N Prasad is discharged

from the brief.

4. These appeals are filed by appellants/claimants

being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated

19.12.2013 passed by the Addl. Senior Civil Judge and

Addl. MACT at Udupi in MVC Nos.232, 233, 234 and

235/2012.

5. For the sake of convenience, parties shall be

referred as per their status before the Tribunal.

6. Appellants called out, no representation.

Heard Sri.Ravish Benni, learned advocate for the 2nd

respondent. Notice to R.1 is dispensed with vide order

dated 27.01.2015. However, instead of dismissing the

appeals for non-prosecution, Court has taken up the cases

for consideration on merit based on the contentions raised

in the appeal memo.

7. Perused the appeals memo, impugned judgment

and heard learned counsel appearing for the

respondent/insurer.

8. The instant appeals are filed challenging the

judgment and award dated 19.12.2013 passed by the

Addl. Senior Civil Judge and Addl. MACT at Udupi in MVC

Nos.232, 233, 234 and 235/2012.

9. There is no dispute over the fact that accident

occurred on 24.06.2011 on account of collision between

lorry bearing No.AP-29-T-9842 and car bearing No.KA-20-

P-1686 near Kandali, B M Road, Hassan, as the lorry driver

drove the lorry in high speed and in rash and negligent

manner. Claimants being the inmates of the car sustained

injuries. Injuries sustained by the claimants are supported

by wound certificates as well as discharge summaries

which are produced and marked before the tribunal.

MFA No.5865/2014

10. Appellant/claimant sustained following injuries

in the accident

1.Lacerated wound, 2 cm x 0.5 cm x bone deep, over right forehead;

2. Abrasion, 6 cm x 0.2 cm over outer and upper aspect of right arm;

3. Lacerated wound 2 cm x 0.5 cm x muscle deep, over right lower thigh;

4. Fracture of 8th and 9th ribs on right side (CT Scan of Abdomen);

5. Laceration of the right lobe of the liver and laceration of upper pole of spleen along with 1.5 litters of haemoperitoneum i.e., blood in the abdominal cavity (CT Scan of Abdomen and Laparotomy findings).

11. Due to the injuries, he was inpatient from

25.06.2011 to 29.06.2011 and from 29.06.2011 to

9.7.2011. Taking into account the injuries sustained by the

claimant and also the disability of 6% suffered by the

claimant, tribunal has awarded compensation of

Rs.2,26,123/- under the following heads:

Pain and suffering            Rs.         30,000/-

Loss of amenities in life     Rs.         10,000/-

Loss of earning capacity      Rs.         32,400/-

Medical expenses              Rs.1,20,723/-

Loss of income during laid Rs.        18,000/-
up period

Attendant charges, food Rs. 15,000/-

and conveyance charges TOTAL Rs.2,26,123/-

12. It is noticed that the accident has occurred in

the year 2011. There is no proof relating to the income of

the claimant. Tribunal has assessed the income of the

claimant at Rs.6,000/- per month. In the absence of proof

relating to income as per the chart prepared by the

Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, notional income

for the year 2011 would be Rs.6500/-. Under the

circumstances, the award of compensation of Rs.18,000/-

under the head 'loss of income during the laid up period'

would be Rs.19,000/- as against Rs.18,000/- awarded by

the tribunal.

13. Loss of future earnings by taking notional

income at Rs.6500/- per month would be Rs.35,100/-

instead of Rs.32,400/- awarded by the tribunal.

14. Therefore, in all the claimant/appellant is

entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.4200/- with

interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation.

Appeal is allowed-in-part.

15. In all other cases, claimants have sustained

simple injuries. Therefore, the tribunal has awarded

compensation as specified herein below:

MFA Nos.5866/2014

16. Claimant herein is a child of 1½ years at the

time of accident. She is represented by her mother as

natural guardian. As a result of the accident, the baby

suffered injuries and she was admitted in the hospital from

24.06.2011 to 25.06.2011 and from 26.06.2011 to

2.7.2011. Tribunal has noticed that claimant has not

suffered any disability on account of the injuries sustained

in the accident. Tribunal after considering the oral and

documentary evidence on record, awarded compensation

as under:

Pain and suffering          Rs.        20,000

Medical expenses            Rs.        28,100

Loss of amenities in life   Rs.        10,000

Conveyance, attendant Rs.              10,000
charges,   food   and
nourishment food
     TOTAL            Rs.              68,100

17. Being dissatisfied, the claimant is in appeal.

After careful perusal of the evidence and the documents on

record, since, there is no disability, considering the age of

the claimant and nature of injury, award of Rs.68,100/- is

just and proper.

Appeal is dismissed.

MFA No.5867/2014

18. Appellant/claimant sustained the following

injuries in the aforesaid accident. She contends that she

was a housewife by profession. She was unable to do her

regular work for a period of two months. Hence, sought

for compensation. The tribunal after considering the oral

and documentary evidence on record has awarded

compensation of Rs.24,300/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from

the date of petition till realisation for the following injuries:

1. Contusion heamatoma lower jaw

2. Contusion Chin

3. Sutured wound over the right supra orbital area

4. Rotator cuff injury right shoulder

5. Contusion Chest

19. Being dissatisfied the claimant is in appeal

before this Court seeking enhancement. On reassessing

the evidence and the materials produced before the Court,

as there is no disability, this Court is of the opinion that

the compensation awarded by the tribunal is just and

proper and needs no interference.

Appeal is dismissed.

MFA 5868/2014

20. Appellant/claimant in the aforesaid accident

sustained the following injuries:

1. Lacerations over the face

2. Contusion chest

3. Contusion back

4. Cerebral Concussion

21. The appellant submits that he was working as

a senior technician 'A' at Master Control Facility (MCF),

Hassan earning Rs.24,630/- per month. The tribunal after

considering the evidence and the documents on record,

awarded compensation as under:

Towards pain and suffering Rs. 10,000 Towards medical expenses Rs. 12,080 Towards conveyance, Rs. 5,000 attendant, food and nourishment food Total Rs. 27,080

22. The claimant being aggrieved by the

compensation awarded has preferred this appeal.

23. Claimant has sustained simple injuries which is

undisputed. Nothing is produced on record to make out a

case for enhancement. Hence, no interference is called

for.

Appeal is dismissed.

24. Hence the following:

ORDER

(i) MFA 5865/2014 is allowed-in-part. MFA

Nos.5866/2014, 5867/2014 and 5868/2014 are dismissed.

(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated