Karnataka High Court
Mr. Rajappa vs The Manager on 14 December, 2023
Author: H.T. Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T. Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:45583
MFA No. 1565 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1565 OF 2021 (MV)
BETWEEN:
MR. RAJAPPA
S/O LATE POOJAPPA
AGED 47 YEARS
R/AT 187, 7TH CROSS
MANJUNATHNAGAR
OPP YELAMMA TEMPLE
MARATHAHALLI
BENGALURU-560 037.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GURUDEV PRASAD K T.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE MANAGER
Digitally signed M/S LIBERTY GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD.,
by OFFICE NO.1, ALYSSA 1ST FLOOR
DHANALAKSHMI
MURTHY REAR PORATION OLD NO.28
Location: High NEW NO.23, RICHMOND ROAD
Court of BENGALURU-560 025.
Karnataka
2. MR.AMITH KUMAR RAJPUT
S/O DARSH RAM RAJPUT
R/AT O.39/2, 2ND CROSS
ANNASANDRAPALYA, HAL POST
BENGLAURU-560 017.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.RAVI S SAMPRATHI., ADVOCATE FOR R1:
SRI. V PRATAP KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2:)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:45583
MFA No. 1565 of 2021
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 08.09.2020
PASSED IN MVC NO. 3197/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE XVII
ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND MEMBER,
M.A.C.T., MAYO HALL UNIT, BENGALURU (SCCH-21),
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
1. 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 08.09.2020 passed by MACT, Bengaluru in MVC
No.3197/2019.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly
stated are that on 06.04.2019 at about 09.25 p.m., while
he was standing on extreme left side of footpath on
Varthuru main road, near Doddanekkund Cake Magic,
Bengaluru, at that time, the rider of the motor cycle
bearing Registration No.KA-01-JC-7298 by riding it in a
rash and negligent manner, dashed against the claimant.
NC: 2023:KHC:45583
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
charges, etc. It was further pleaded that the accident
occurred purely on account of the rash and negligent
riding of the offending vehicle by its rider.
4. On service of notice, the respondent Nos.1 and 2
appeared through counsel and filed written statement in
which the averments made in the petition were denied. It
was pleaded that the petition itself is false and frivolous in
the eye of law. The age, avocation and income of the
claimant and the medical expenses are denied. It was
further pleaded that the quantum of compensation claimed
by the claimant is exorbitant. Hence, they sought for
dismissal of the petition.
NC: 2023:KHC:45583
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, Dr.Chidanand K.J.C., was examined as PW-2 and two
witness were examined as PW-3 and PW-4 and got
exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P20. On behalf of
the respondents, one witness was examined as RW-1 but
no document was marked. The Claims Tribunal, by the
impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took
place on account of rash and negligent riding of the
offending vehicle by its rider, as a result of which, the
claimant sustained injuries. The Tribunal further held that
the claimant is entitled to a compensation of
Rs.4,43,846.40/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.
and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the
compensation amount along with interest excluding the
interest for future medical expenses. Being aggrieved, the
present appeal has been filed.
NC: 2023:KHC:45583
6. The learned counsel for the claimant has raised the
following contentions:
a) Firstly, even though the claimant claims that he was
working as carpenter and bar bender and earning
Rs.27,000/- per month, but the Tribunal has taken the
notional income as merely as Rs.11,000/- p.m.
b) Secondly, the claimant has examined the doctor as
PW-2. The doctor in his evidence has stated that the
claimant has suffered disability of 47% to particular limb
and 23.5% to whole body. But the Tribunal has taken the
whole body disability at 15%, which is on the lower side.
c) Thirdly, due to the accident, the claimant has
sustained grievous injuries. He was treated as inpatient for
a period of 51 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 same, the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal under the heads of 'loss of amenities', 'pain and
sufferings' and other incidental expenses are on the lower
side. Hence, he sought for allowing the appeal.
NC: 2023:KHC:45583
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the
Insurance Company has raised following counter
contentions:
a) Firstly, even though the claimant claims that he was
earning Rs.27,000/- per month, he has not produced any
documents to establish his income. In the absence of proof
of income, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the income of
the claimant notionally.
b) Secondly, even though the doctor has assessed the
whole body disability at 23.5%, the Tribunal considering
the injuries sustained by the claimant and evidence of the
doctor, has rightly assessed the whole body disability at
15%.
c) Thirdly, considering the injuries sustained by the
claimant and considering the age and avocation of the
claimant, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under
the heads of 'loss of amenities', 'pain and sufferings' and
other incidental expenses are just and reasonable and it
does not call for interference. Hence, he sought for
dismissal of the appeal.
NC: 2023:KHC:45583
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 on 06.04.2019
due to rash and negligent riding of the offending vehicle
by its rider.
10. The claimant claims that he was earning Rs.27,000/-
per month. He has not produced any documents to prove
his income. Therefore, in the absence of proof of income,
notional income has to be assessed. As per the guidelines
issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority,
for the accident taken place in the year 2019, the notional
income has to be taken at Rs.14,000/- p.m.
11. As per wound certificate, the claimant has sustained
haemotoma over right fronto temporal region, CT scan
showed orbital fracture with sub-archnoid haemorhage,
NC: 2023:KHC:45583
head injury and fracture of right femur. The doctor in his
evidence has stated that the claimant has suffered
disability of 47% to particular limb and 23.5% to whole
body. Therefore, taking into consideration the deposition
of the doctor and injuries mentioned in the wound
certificate and discharge summary, I am of the opinion
that the whole body disability is assessed at 16%. The
claimant is aged about 45 years at the time of the
accident and multiplier applicable to his age group is '14'.
Thus, the claimant is entitled for compensation of
Rs.3,76,320/- (Rs.14,000*12*14*16%) on account of
'loss of future income'.
12. The nature of injuries suggests that the claimant
must have been under rest and treatment for a period of
5 months. Therefore, the claimant is entitled for
compensation of Rs.70,000/- (Rs.14,000*5 months)
under the head 'loss of income during laid up period'.
NC: 2023:KHC:45583
13. The claimant was treated as inpatient for more than
51 days in the hospital and thereafter, has received
further treatment. Hence, I am inclined to enhance the
compensation awarded under the head of 'food,
nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges' from
Rs.20,000/- to Rs.30,000/-.
14. Due to the accident, the claimant has suffered
grievous injuries and also undergone surgery. He has
suffered lot of pain during treatment and he has to suffer
with the disability stated by the doctor throughout his life.
Considering the same, I am inclined to enhance the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of
'pain and sufferings' from Rs.40,000/- to Rs.50,000/-
and under the head of 'loss of amenities' from Rs.25,000/-
to Rs.40,000/-.
15. Considering the nature of injuries, the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is just and
reasonable.
- 10 -
NC: 2023:KHC:45583
16. Thus, the claimant is entitled to the following
compensation:
As awarded As awarded
by the by this
Compensation under
Tribunal Court
different Heads
(Rs.) (Rs.)
Pain and sufferings 40,000 50,000
Medical expenses 1,12,608 1,12,608
Food, nourishment, 20,000 30,000
conveyance and
attendant charges
Loss of income during 55,000 70,000
laid up period
Loss of amenities 25,000 40,000
Loss of future income 2,77,200 3,76,320
Future medical expenses 25,000 25,000
Total 5,54,808 7,03,928
Less 20% of contributory 1,10,961.60 1,40,785
negligence
Total Compensation 4,43,846.40 5,63,143
payable
17. In the result, the following order is passed:
- 11 -
NC: 2023:KHC:45583
ORDER
a) The appeal is allowed in part.
b) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
c) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of
Rs.5,63,143/-.
d) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit 80%
of the compensation amount i.e. Rs.5,63,143/- 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 excluding interest for the
compensation awarded under the head of 'future
medical expenses'.
Sd/-
JUDGE
HA
