Savithri Acharya vs Dr Mahesh S
2022 Latest Caselaw 9836 Kant

                             1



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

         DATED THIS THE 28th DAY OF JUNE 2022

                         BEFORE

     THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD

                MFA No.5500 OF 2019(MV)


BETWEEN:

Savithri Acharya,
Aged about 37 years,
W/o.Sri Srinivasa Acharya,
R/at 'Anugraha Nilaya',
Hepejaru, Mudaru Village,
Bajagoli Post,
Karkala Taluk.                               ... Appellant

(By Ms.Nazufa M.Mulla, for Sri H.Pavana Chandra Shetty,
Advocate)

AND:

1.     Dr.Mahesh S.
       Aged about 45 years,
       S/o.Sri Krishna Bhat S.
       R/at # 325, Nagashree,
       2nd Cross, LBS Nagar,
       Shivamogga - 577 201.

2.     The Branch Manager,
       The TATA AIG General Insurance
       Co.Ltd., Hubli Branch,
       Hubli.                           ... Respondents

(By Sri Hegde Mulkhand, Advocate for R2:
Notice to R1 dispensed with)
                             2




       This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act,
against the Judgment and Award dated 16.02.2019
passed in MVC No.698/2018 on the file of the Senior Civil
Judge and AMACT, Karkala, partly allowing the claim
petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of
compensation.

      This MFA, coming on for admission, this day, this
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 and decree dated 16.02.2019 passed

by the AMACT, Karkala in MVC No.698/2018.

2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal

briefly stated are that on 15.04.2018 at about 8.00

a.m., the claimant was proceeding on her Honda

Activa bearing registration No.KA-20/EP-3656 from

Bajagoli towards Karkala. When she reached near

Kambla Junction, at that time, a car bearing

registration No.KA-14/P-1595 being driven by its

driver 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 she 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 respondent Nos.1

and 2 appeared through counsel and filed separate

written statements in which the averments made in

the petition were denied. The age, avocation and

income of the claimant and the medical expenses are

denied.

5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties,

the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter

recorded the evidence. The claimant herself was

examined as PW-1 and got exhibited documents

namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P22 and C1 and C2. On behalf of

the respondents, neither any witness was examined

nor got exhibited documents. 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.1,28,900/- along with interest @

8% 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 due to the accident the claimant has

suffered grievous injuries, she was inpatient for a

period of 10 days, she has spent more than

Rs.42,900/- towards medical expenses. The overall

compensation awarded by the Tribunal at

Rs.1,28,900/- is on the lower side. Hence, he sought

for enhancement of compensation.

7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for

the Insurance Company has raised following counter

contentions:

Firstly, the injury suffered by the claimant are

minor in nature, she was inpatient only for a period of

10 days, she has not examined the doctor.

Considering the injuries and considering the evidence

of PW-1, the overall compensation awarded by the

Tribunal is just and reasonable.

Secondly, in view of the law laid down by a

Division Bench of this Court in the case of

MS.JOYEETA BOSE AND OTHERS vs.

VENKATESHAN.V AND OTHERS (MFA 5896/2018

and connected matters disposed of on

24.8.2020), the rate of interest awarded by the

Tribunal at 8% p.a. 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.

9. It is not in dispute that the claimant has

sustained injuries in the road traffic accident occurred

due to rash and negligent driving of the offending

vehicle by its driver.

Due to the accident, the claimant has suffered

tenderness around the unbalicees and other injuries.

She has spent Rs.42,900/- towards medical expenses.

Considering the evidence of PW-1 and considering the

wound certificate - Ex-P7, I am of the opinion that in

addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal,

the claimant is entitled to Rs.35,000/-.

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.1,63,900/- as against Rs. 1,28,900/- awarded

by the Tribunal.

In view of the law laid down by a Division Bench

of this Court in JOYEETA BOSE (supra) the

enhanced compensation carries interest @ 6% p.a.

The Insurance Company is directed to deposit

the compensation amount along with interest @ 8%

p.a. (interest @ 6% p.a. on the enhanced

compensation) 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

Cm/-