Karnataka High Court
Rangaswamy vs Kumaraswamy on 13 October, 2022
Bench: H T Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MFA No.8869 OF 2019(MV)
BETWEEN
RANGASWAMY
S/O THIMMAIAHA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
R/O SORALAMAVU VILLAGE
HANDANAKERE HOBLI
C N HALLI TALUK
TUMKUR DISTRICT-572214.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.CHANDRASHEKARA K A., ADV.)
AND
1. KUMARASWAMY
S/O RUDRAPPAGOWDA
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS
ULLAL MAIN ROAD
6TH MAIN ROAD
ANNAPURNESWARI EXTESNION
BENGALURU-560091.
2. FUTURE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
LIMITED
2
3RD AND 4TH BUILDING
SHARAVANE KRISHNE MANSION
100FT ROAD, JAYANAGARA
BENGALURU-560041
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.P.S.JAGADISH, ADV. FOR R2:
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH
V/O DATED: 13.10.2022)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF
MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED. 18.06.2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.427/2016,
ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND XIX
MACT, CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI, PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY,
THE 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 dated 18.6.2019 passed by MACT,
Chikkanayakanahalli in MVC 427/2016.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal
briefly stated are that on 3.2.2016 when the claimant
was proceeding on motorcycle bearing registration
No.KA-44-L-1473 on Davanagere-Bangalore NH-4,
towards Holalkere road, near Murugamatha, at that
time, car bearing registration No.KA05-MD-5531 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 he 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 No.2
appeared through counsel and filed written statement
in which the averments made in the petition were
denied.
The respondent No.1 did not appear before the
Tribunal inspite of service of notice and was placed
ex-parte.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties,
the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter
recorded the evidence. The claimant himself was
examined as PW-1 and Dr.Ravinath was examined as
PW-2 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to
Ex.P118. On behalf of the respondents, neither any
witness was examined nor any document was
produced. 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.404,974/- along with interest at the rate of 6%
p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to deposit
the compensation amount along with interest. Being
aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimant has
contended that claimant was aged about 35 years at
the time of the accident and earning Rs.15,000/- p.m.
by doing agricultural work. As per wound certificate,
he has sustained CLW over the left maxillary region,
deformity of the left thigh, loss of left upper incisor
teeth, abrasion over the left frontal region, left
segmental fracture for the femur, fracture of left distal
1/3rd fibula. PW-2, the doctor has stated in his
evidence that the claimant has suffered disability of
35% to particular limb. Due to the accident, the
claimant has sustained grievous injuries. He was
treated as inpatient for a period of 25 days. Even after
discharge from the hospital, he was not in a position
to discharge his regular work. He has suffered lot of
pain during treatment. Considering the nature of
injuries, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal
under the heads of 'pain and sufferings', 'loss of
amenities' and other incidental expenses is on the
lower side. Hence, he sought for allowing the appeal.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for
the Insurance Company has contended that the
injuries sustained by the claimant are minor in nature.
He has not produced any documents to establish his
income. The disability stated by the doctor at 35% to
particular limb will not affect his day to day activities.
Considering the age and avocation of the claimant, the
Tribunal has granted just and reasonable
compensation and it does not call for interference.
Hence, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties
and perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.
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.
As per wound certificate, the claimant has
sustained CLW over the left maxillary region,
deformity of the left thigh, loss of left upper incisor
teeth, abrasion over the left frontal region, left
segmental fracture for the femur, fracture of left distal
1/3rd fibula. PW-2, the doctor has stated in his
evidence that the claimant has suffered disability of
35% to particular limb. The Tribunal has rightly
assessed the whole body disability at 12%. Due to the
accident, the claimant has sustained grievous injuries.
He was treated as inpatient for a period of 25 days.
Even after discharge from the hospital, he was not in
a position to discharge his regular work. He has
suffered lot of pain during treatment. Therefore,
considering the age and avocation of the claimant and
considering the injuries sustained by the claimant, I
am inclined to award compensation of Rs.60,000/- in
addition to compensation of Rs.404,974/- awarded by
the Tribunal.
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.464,974/-.
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit
the compensation amount along with interest @ 6%
p.a. 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
DM
