Karnataka High Court
Sri T Basavaiah vs The Manager on 3 November, 2022
Bench: H.P.Sandesh
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH
M.F.A.NO.3590/2016 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI T. BASAVAIAH,
S/O. LATE THIMMAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS,
R/AT NO.22, 9TH CROSS,
5TH MAIN ROAD, PARIMALANAGAR,
NANDINI LAYOUT,
BANGALORE-560 096.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI MAHADEVA SWAMY P, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE MANAGER,
TATA AIG GEN. INS. CO. LTD.
NO.69, MILLER'S ROAD,
BANGALORE-56.
2. INDUKURU GURU PRASAD,
S/O UTHAPPA,
C/O BALAIAH, NO.E-53-A,
9TH CROSS, PARIMALANAGAR,
NANDINI LAYOUT,
BANGALORE-96.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI MALLIKARJUN REDDY N.A., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R1,
VIDE ORDER DATED 19.02.2018,
NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)
2
THIS M.F.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 9.2.2016 PASSED
IN MVC NO.5111/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE 22ND ADDITIONAL
SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, 20TH ACMM, MEMBER, MACT,
BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the
learned counsel for respondent No.1.
2. This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and
award dated 09.02.2016, passed in M.V.C.No.5111/2013, on the
file of the XXII Additional Small Causes Judge and XX ACMM and
Member, MACT, Bengaluru ('the Tribunal' for short) questioning
the quantum of compensation.
3. The factual matrix of the case of the claimant before
the Tribunal is that he met with an accident and as a result he
has suffered communited fracture distal end of radius right and
he underwent surgery of external fixator and K-wire fixation.
The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.20,000/- under the head
pain and suffering. Taking note of the injuries suffered by the
claimant, an additional amount of Rs.10,000/- is awarded
under the head pain and suffering.
4. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.49,043/-
under the head medical expenses and the same is based on
documentary evidence and hence it does not require interference
of this Court.
5. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.5,000/-
under the head food and nourishment, conveyance and
attendant charges and the claimant was an inpatient for a period
of four days. Hence, the amount awarded by the Tribunal is just
and reasonable and does not require interference of this Court.
6. The doctor assessed the disability of 10% to the
whole body, however the claimant continued the job and hence
the Tribunal has rightly not awarded any compensation under
the head future loss of income.
7. The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.20,000/-
under the head loss of amenities of life and the same is meager
and hence additional compensation of Rs.10,000/- is awarded
under the said head.
8. The Tribunal has not considered the loss of income
during the laid up period. The claimant has suffered the fracture
and it requires minimum one month for uniting of fracture and
for rest. No documents are placed before the Court for how long
he was an inpatient in the hospital. The claimant was an
employee and he was drawing salary of Rs.39,000/- per month.
Hence, one month salary is taken as loss of income and the
same is rounded off to Rs.40,000/-.
9. In all, the claimant is entitled for additional
compensation of Rs.60,000/-.
10. In view of the discussions made above, I pass the
following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award of the
Tribunal dated 09.02.2016, passed in
M.V.C.No.5111/2013, is modified granting
additional compensation of Rs.60,000/- with
interest at 6% per annum from the date of
petition till deposit.
(iii) The Insurance Company is directed to pay the
compensation amount with interest within six
weeks from today.
(iv) The Registry is directed to transmit the records
to the concerned Tribunal, forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE
MD
