Sri.Kanthappa vs Sri.G.R.Raghu
2022 Latest Caselaw 9936 Kant

                               1

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2022

                          BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

                M.F.A.No.6304/2016 (W.C.)

BETWEEN:

Sri.Kanthappa
S/o Veeranna @ Eranna
Aged about 44 years
Residing at Kombihalli village
Kudligi taluk, Bellary district
Now residing at Lingapura
Near Shridevi Engineering
College, Tumkur Town.              ... APPELLANT

(By Sri.Gopalkrishna, Adv.)

AND:

1. Sri.G.R.Raghu
   S/o G.L.Ramakrishna
   Aged about 39 years
   Residing at Balaji Nilaya
   1st Cross, Ashokanagar
   Tumkur Town

2. Reliance General
   Insurance Co.Ltd.
   Environ Towers
   2nd Floor, 60/4, Hosur
   Main Road,
   Electronic City
   Bangalore-560 100
   Rep. by is Manager.              ... RESPONDENTS

(By Sri.H.S.Lingaraj, Adv. For R-2;
 Notice to R-1 dispensed v/o dt.11.6.2019)
                                 2

      This MFA is filed under Section 30(1) of Employees
Compensation Act, against the judgment and award dated
01.12.2015 passed in ECA No.83/2014 on the file of the
2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT., Tumakuru,
allowing the claim petition filed under Section 10 of the
Workmen's Compensation Act.

      This appeal coming on for Admission this day, the
Court delivered the following:

                         JUDGMENT

Heard the learned Advocate appearing for the

appellant and the learned Advocate appearing for the

second respondent/insurer. Notice to the first

respondent is dispensed.

2. The appellant in this case is questioning the

judgment and award dated 1st December 2015 passed

by the M.A.C.T., Tumakuru in E.C.A.No.83/2014.

3. The appellant/claimant had filed

E.C.A.No.83/2014 on the file of the II Additional

Senior Civil Judge and Motor Accident Claims

Tribunal, Tumakuru, seeking compensation. In terms

of the impugned judgment and award, the petition is

allowed in part awarding a compensation of

Rs.4,36,500/- along with interest @ 9% per annum

from 30th day of accident till realization, fastening

liability on the owner/respondent No.1 and

insurer/respondent No.2.

4. The claimant was working as driver under

respondent No.1 on a monthly salary of `8,000/- and

`150/- per day as batta. On 30.05.2011, during the

course of his employment, he met with an accident

due to rash and negligent driving of the KSRTC bus

bearing Reg.No.KA-35/F-78 by its driver, as a result of

which, he suffered grievous injuries. The claimant

took treatment as an inpatient from 31.05.2011 to

02.06.2011 and underwent operation. It is further

claimed that due to the injuries, he was unable to do

any work and suffered permanent disability. Hence,

he filed the claim petition claiming compensation. The

Tribunal has awarded compensation of `4,36,500/-

along with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. The claimant

being dissatisfied with the award has presented the

instant appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.

5. The insurer has admitted the liability. The

insurer has not questioned the impugned judgment

and award. The only question that needs to be

answered in this case is,

"Whether the claimant is entitled for enhanced compensation?"

6. It is the case of the claimant that, on

account of the accident, he has suffered grievous

injuries and the medical documents and x-rays reveal

that the claimant has suffered spinal bone fracture

and that there is weakness in the lower limbs and he

could stand and walk without support and there is

difficult to pass urine. Looking to the materials

produced by the claimant, while calculating the loss of

future income due to disability, the Tribunal has taken

80% disability to the whole body and has awarded

compensation of `3,54,000/- under the head of "loss

of future income due to disabilities".

7. There is no dispute relating to the

relationship of employer and employee. The accident

took place on 30.05.2011. The Tribunal has assessed

the income of the claimant at `4,000/- per month.

Admittedly, there was an amendment to the Schedule

on 31.05.2010 and in terms of the said amendment,

the income has to be taken at `8,000/- per month.

The disability assessed at 80% is also not disputed by

the insurer. Accordingly, the claimant is entitled for

`7,08,000/- towards loss of income due to disability

(`8000/- x 60% x 184.17(factor) x 80% disability).

8. It is noticed from the impugned judgment

and award that the Tribunal has awarded `82,500/-

towards "medical expenses" as against the bills

produced by the claimant for a sum of `98,525/-.

Considering the injuries sustained by the claimant,

this court is of the view that the award of `82,500/-

under the head of "medical expenses" is just and

proper.

         9.    Under       the          circumstances,         the

compensation has to be enhanced.              Accordingly, the

compensation is re-computed as follows:

AMOUNT Sl.No. PARTICULARS (IN RUPEES) Loss of income due to disability A 7,08,000/-

(Rs.8000x60%x184.17(factor)x80% disability) B Medical expenses 82,500/-

                        TOTAL                       7,90,500/-


         10.   Hence,    the    total   compensation      is   re-

determined by this Court as `7,90,500/- as against

`4,36,500/- awarded by the Tribunal.

11. It is also noticed that the Tribunal has

awarded only 9% interest on the compensation

awarded. However, the claimant is entitled for 12%

interest after one month from the date of accident till

the date of payment.

12. The substantial question of law is answered

in favour of appellant.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The

judgment and award dated 1st December 2015 passed

by the M.A.C.T., Tumakuru in E.C.A.No.83/2014

stands modified, awarding total compensation of

`7,90,500/- as with interest at the rate of 12% per

annum from 30th day of accident till realization.

Sd/-

JUDGE

KNM/-