Smt.Huligamma W./O. Mahesh vs Sri.Veeresh.M. S/O. Sri Suresh M
2022 Latest Caselaw 5566 Kant

                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                                      DHARWAD BENCH

                        DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                                           BEFORE
                        THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA


                              M.F.A. NO. 100549 OF 2019 (MV-I)
                   BETWEEN:

                        SMT .HULIGAMMA W/O. MAHESH
                        AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEWIFE,
                        R/O. 1ST CROSS, SIDDARTHA COLONY,
                        BALLARI-583101.
                                                               ....APPELLANT
                   (BY SMT SOUBHAGYA V., ADVOCATE FOR
                   SRI LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.   SRI VEERESH M. S/O. SRI SURESH M.,
                        AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,
                        DRIVER OF THE CAR BEARING NO. KA-34/A-9633,.
                        R/O. CHAITANYA COLLEGE, SIDDARTHA COLONY,
                        1ST CROSS, MOKA ROAD, GANDHI NAGAR,
                        BALLARI-583101.

                   2.   SRI P. N. MURALI KRISHNA S/O. SRI Y. V. N.
                        MURTHY,
                        AGED ABOUT 28YEARS,
                        OWNER OF THE CAR BEARING NO. KA-34/A-9633,
J
MAMATHA
                        R/O. NO.26, SN PET, BALLARI-583101.

Digitally signed
by J MAMATHA
                   3.   THE BRANCH MANAGER,
Location:
Dharwad
Date:
                        M/S. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
2022.03.31
11:44:20 +0530          LIMITED,
                        BALLARI-583101.
                        POLICY NO. 1412552338000134,
                        VALID FROM 13.6.2015-12.6.2016.
                                                           ...RESPONDENTS
                                    2




                                               MFA No. 100549 of 2019



(BY SRI S.V.YAJI, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.3)
(SERVICE OF NOTICE TO RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND                        2-
DISPENSED WITH)

     THIS M.F.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF THE
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY
MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 12.03.2018
PASSED BY MACT-III, BALLARI, IN MVC NO.1133/2015 BY
ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION AND AWARDING A TOTAL
COMPENSATION OF RS.10,00,000/- TO THE APPELLANT AND
PASS OTHER ORDER OR ORDERS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT
DEEMS FIT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

     THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

                           JUDGMENT

Being dissatisfied with the compensation of

Rs.2,97,200/-, the claimant is in appeal.

2. The occurrence of the accident on 04.08.2015

and the offending vehicle was being insured is not in

dispute.

3. The Tribunal has noticed that according to the

treated Doctor, the claimant had suffered 22% disability to

the whole body. However, the Tribunal has chosen to

assess the disability at 15% to the whole body.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant points out

that this deviation from the Doctors evidence was

MFA No. 100549 of 2019

improper. In my view, there is some justification in this

argument and it would be therefore appropriate to

consider the disability to the whole body at 20%, instead

of 15% to the whole body as assessed by the Tribunal.

5. The Tribunal has taken the monthly income of

the claimant at Rs.6,000/- since there was no

documentary evidence. In such a situation, it would be

appropriate to adopt the monthly income as determined by

the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority to the

accidents for the year 2015, which was Rs.8,000/-. The

claimant was aged 55 years and therefore, it would be

appropriate to adopt the multiplier 11. Consequently, the

claimant would be entitled to (Rs.8,000/- X 12 X 11 X

20/100) Rs.2,11,200/- towards loss of future income.

6. In my view, a sum of Rs.30,000/- is awarded

towards pain and suffering, which requires enhancement

to Rs.40,000/-. Since the income is now taken at

Rs.8,000/- per month, the loss of income during the laid

up period would be a sum of Rs.24,000/- as against

MFA No. 100549 of 2019

Rs.15,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. The sum of

Rs.15,000/- awarded towards attendant charges,

conveyance and other incidental expenses is also entitled

to be enhanced to Rs.20,000/-.

7. A sum of Rs.70,000/- awarded towards medical

expenses based on the documentary evidence is

maintained. Similarly, a sum of Rs.30,000/- awarded

towards loss of amenities and Rs.40,000/- towards

permanent physical impairment is also maintained.

Consequently, the claimant is entitled to Rs.4,35,200/- as

against Rs.2,97,200/- awarded by the Tribunal.

Accordingly, appeal is allowed in part.

8. The enhanced compensation shall carry interest

at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till

deposit.

SD JUDGE

CKK