Karnataka High Court
Benvina Guddadaiah S vs Mahesh S V on 4 December, 2023
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:43628
MFA No. 7450 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.7450 OF 2017(MV-I)
BETWEEN:
BENVINA GUDDADAIAH S.,
S/O LATE SANNA RANGAIAH,
NOW AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS,
R/AT NO.238/19, 2ND CROSS,
ADHARSHANAGAR, ARASHINAKUNTE,
KASABA HOBLI, NELAMANGALA TALUK,
BANGALORE RURAL - 562 123.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RANGEGOWDA N.R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally 1. MAHESH S.V.,
signed by JAI
JYOTHI J S/O VENKATARMANA SWAMY S.,
Location: AGED MAJOR,
HIGH COURT NO.1897/ID, KUDIUVA KATTE,
OF
KARNATAKA HANUMANTHANAGAR,
CHANNAPATTANA,
RAMANAGARAM DISTRICT - 562 160.
2. THE MANAGER,
HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
NO.108 TO 111, 1ST FLOOR,
GINIVA HOUSE, CUNNINGHAM ROAD,
BANGALORE - 560 052.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. D. VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
VIDE ORDER DATED 03.08.2022, NOTICE TO
R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.04.2017 PASSED IN MVC
NO.651/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XVI ADDITIONAL JUDGE,
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:43628
MFA No. 7450 of 2017
MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE,
(SCCH-14), ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the award passed in MVC No.651/2016
dated 01.04.2017 the claimant is before this Court. The
claim petition is filed seeking compensation of an amount
of Rs.15,50,000/- for the injuries sustained by the
claimant in an accident. The Court below had granted an
amount of Rs.7,69,000/-.
2. As per the evidence of PWs.1 and 4 and as per
Exs.P6 and 7, the claimant had sustained the following
injuries:-
i. Fracture of right tibia.
ii. Fracture of right fibula.
iii. Fracture of left humerus
iv. Fracture of right fronto zygomatic
and maxillary bone.
v. Abrasions over left knee, right hand
and face.
NC: 2023:KHC:43628
Surgery was done and for the said injuries and
according to the claimant he had spent huge amount for
the treatment.
3. It is the case of the claimant that he is aged
about 52 years and working in Himalaya Drug Company
and earning Rs.36,600/- per month. The Court below had
observed that claimant has produced the pay slips and
there is no difference of salary after the accident. Further
the Doctor had opined that claimant had sustained 24% of
disability to the limb and whole body at 13%. Considering
that injuries had no impact on his future earning, Court
below had not granted any amount under the head of 'loss
of future income', towards 'pain and suffering', an amount
of Rs.1,00,000/- is awarded, towards 'medical expenses'
based on the evidence, an amount of Rs.2,76,000/- is
awarded, towards 'nourishment conveyance charges' an
amount of Rs.30,000/- is awarded, towards 'loss of income
during the laid up period' an amount of Rs.1,08,000/- is
awarded, towards 'disability', an amount of Rs.1,00,000/-
NC: 2023:KHC:43628
is awarded, towards 'loss of amenities' an amount of
Rs.25,000/- is awarded, towards 'future medical expenses'
an amount of Rs.30,000/- is awarded. Altogether
compensation of an amount of Rs.7,69,000/- was
awarded.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant
submits that when the Doctor has deposed that the
claimant had sustained 13% disability to the whole body,
Court ought to have granted the compensation under the
head of 'loss of future income' by applying the multiplier.
It is submitted that considering the injuries, Court below
granting an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- under the head of
'pain and suffering' was on the lower side. He submits
that for the disability and the 'loss of amenities' only
Rs.1,25,000/- was granted, which is also on the lower
side. He submits that the compensation awarded by the
tribunal was not just and reasonable.
5. On the other hand, the learned counsel
appearing for the Insurance Company submits that the
NC: 2023:KHC:43628
Court below considering the evidence on record had rightly
granted the compensation. He submits that as there was
no 'loss of future income', Court had rightly granted the
compensation.
6. Having heard the learned counsel on either
side, perused the entire material on record. Claimant had
sustained four grievous injuries and the Court below had
granted an amount Rs,1,00,000/- as compensation
towards 'disability' which is reasonable and no grounds are
made out seeking interference of this Court. Even under
the head of 'medical expenses, nourishment, loss of
income and future medical expenses', Court below had
granted substantially a reasonable amount. When coming
to the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant
that claimant is entitled for compensation under the head
of 'loss of future income due to disability', this Court is not
able to appreciate the said submission. The Court below
had rightly considered the evidence, which shows that
claimant had continued with his job and there is no
NC: 2023:KHC:43628
reduction of salary. In each case of disability, claimant
will not be entitled for 'loss of future income' unless and
until it has an impact on his future earning. The Court
below considering all these aspects has rightly not applied
the multiplier and under the head of 'disability' an amount
of Rs.1,00,000/- and under the head of 'loss of amenity'
an amount Rs.25,000/- is granted. Considering the
injuries sustained by the claimant and the impact of this,
this Court is inclined to grant an amount of Rs.50,000/-
under the head of 'loss of amenities'. Claimant is not
entitled for compensation under the head of loss of
disabilities. All together the claimant is entitled for an
amount of Rs.7,94,000/-.
Accordingly, the appeal of the claimant is allowed-
in-part by enhancing the compensation from
Rs.7,69,200/- to Rs.7,94,000/-.
i) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6%
p.a. from the date of petition till the date of
realization.
NC: 2023:KHC:43628
ii) The respondent - insurance company shall
deposit the amount within a period of eight
weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the
judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is
entitled to withdraw the entire amount without
furnishing any security.
iv) Registry is directed to return the Trial Court
Records to the Tribunal, along with certified
copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith
without any delay.
v) No costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand
closed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
GPG
CT:SNN
