Karnataka High Court
The Manager, National Insurance ... vs Sidram And Ors on 30 August, 2023
Bench: Ravi V Byrvhj
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:6881
MFA No. 201006 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI V HOSMANI
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201006 OF 2017 (MV)
BETWEEN:
THE MANAGER,
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICE, BASAVESHWAR CIRCLE,
BIDAR, THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, MAIN ROAD,
KALABURAGI - 585 102.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. BHADRASHETTY SANGEETA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SIDRAM SHAMAPPA SHETTEPNOR,
Digitally signed AGE: 63 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, NOW NIL,
by
LUCYGRACE R/O GOUR VILLAGE, TQ. BASAVAKALYAN,
Location: HIGH DIST. BIDAR-585 327.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
2. SURYAKANTH S/O BASAPPA MADKI,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC:BUSINESS & OWNER OF
LORRY BEARING REG.NO.KA-39/6589,
R/O MANNAEKHELI,
TQ. & DIST. BIDAR-585 227.
...RESPONDENTS
(SRI. B.C. JAKA, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
V/O DATED 11.08.2023 NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC-K:6881
MFA No. 201006 of 2017
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY SETTING
ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD IN MVC
NO.612/2014, DATED 03.01.2017, PASSED BY THE II ADDL.
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND ADDL. MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BIDR, SITTING AT
BASAVAKALYAN.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Challenging judgment and award dated 03.01.2017
passed by II Addl. District and Sessions Judge and Addl.
MACT, Bidar (for short 'Tribunal'), Sitting at Basavakalyan
in MVC No.612/2014, this appeal is filed.
2. Though appeal is listed for admission, with
consent of learned counsel for parties, it is taken up for
final disposal.
3. Smt.Bhadrashetty Sangeeta, learned counsel
for appellant submitted that appeal was by insurer,
challenging award on quantum. It was submitted that in
an accident that occurred on 16.10.2014, claimant, who
was travelling in auto-rickshaw bearing registration
no.KA-9/3007 sustained grievous injuries, when lorry
NC: 2023:KHC-K:6881
MFA No. 201006 of 2017
bearing registration no.KA-39/6589 driven by its driver in
rash and negligent manner, causing accident. Despite
taking treatment, he did not recover fully and sustained
permanent physical disability. Claiming compensation for
same, claim petition was filed before Tribunal under
Section 166 of Motor Vehicles Act against owner and
insurer of lorry.
4. It was submitted that claim petition was
contested by insurer not only denying entire claim petition
averments, but also contending that driver of tanker was
not holding valid driving licence as on date of accident and
violated policy conditions. Thereafter, Tribunal framed
issues and recorded evidence. Claimant was examined as
PW.1 and EXs.P1 to P14 were marked. No evidence was
led by insurer.
5. On consideration, Tribunal held that accident
had occurred due to rash and negligent driving of insured
vehicle by its driver and insurer was held liable to pay
compensation of Rs.1,41,000/- with interest at 7% p.a.
NC: 2023:KHC-K:6881
MFA No. 201006 of 2017
from date of petition till realisation. It was submitted that
though claimant had claimed that due to fracture neck of
femur left side and fracture of right radius and femur he
suffered functional disability, he did not either examine
doctor, who treated him, nor got his disability assessed
and without even producing disability certificate, filed
claim petition. Even discharge summary was also not
produced. Therefore, Tribunal was not justified in awarding
compensation towards medical expenses, attendant and
other incidental expenses, damages to bone and health
etc. It was also submitted that even award of rate of
interest at 7% p.a. was excessive and sought for allowing
appeal.
6. On other hand, Shri.B.C. Jaka, learned counsel
for respondent no.1 sought to justify award.
7. Heard learned counsel, perused impugned
judgment and award.
NC: 2023:KHC-K:6881
MFA No. 201006 of 2017
8. From above submission and since insurer is
challenging award only on quantum, point that arises for
consideration is:
"Whether assessment of compensation by
Tribunal calls for interference.?"
9. In order to establish injury and entitlement of
compensation, claimant has produced FIR, Complaint,
Spot Panchanama, Further statement, Statement of
Sidram, M.V.A. report, Wound certificate, Charge sheet,
Hospital bills, Medical bills (10), Pathology reports (3), DL,
Insurance Policy and X-rays (3) marked at Exs.P1 to P14
respectively. On perusal of same, Tribunal has observed
that claimant had sustained fracture neck of femur left
side and fracture of femur right radius. In fact, Ex.P7 -
wound certificate would also disclose same. Claimant has
also produced medical bills for Rs.52,000/-. However,
Tribunal has awarded compensation of only Rs.30,000/-
towards medical expenses on ground that sum of bills
were not complete printed bills.
NC: 2023:KHC-K:6881
MFA No. 201006 of 2017
10. Considering age of claimant as 70 years, in
absence of specific evidence regarding loss of earning
capacity, Tribunal has awarded a lump-sum amount of
Rs.50,000/- for fracture. Considering advanced age of
claimant and effect of fractures on senior citizen, award
under any circumstances would not appear to be either
unjustified or grossly excessive to warrant interference.
11. Insofar as rate of interest, indeed this Court in
Shriram General Insurance Company Limited,
Rajasthan vs. Smt.Laxmi and others1 has held that rate
of interest in motor accident claims cannot be more than
6% in view of Section 30 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In
instant case, on over all consideration, award of
Rs.1,41,000/- for two fractures would not appear to be
unjustified. Hence, in facts and circumstances of this case,
I do not intend to interfere with impugned award.
12. Point for consideration is answered accordingly.
Consequently, following:
2018 (4) AKR 808
NC: 2023:KHC-K:6881
MFA No. 201006 of 2017
ORDER
i. Appeal is dismissed.
ii. Amount in deposit is ordered to be transmitted
to Tribunal for payment.
iii. Appellant-insurer shall deposit balance
compensation within six weeks from date of
receipt of certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE
LG
