Karnataka High Court
Mohammed Afreed Navaz @ M D Afreed Nawaz vs United India Insurance Company Ltd on 6 December, 2023
Author: H.T. Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T. Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
MFA No. 6452 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 6461 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6452 OF 2022 (MV)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6461 OF 2022(MV)
IN MFA 6452/2022
BETWEEN:
MOHAMMED AFREED NAVAZ @
M D AFREED NAWAZ
S/O J KALEEM PASHA
NOW AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
R/AT NO.3, 3RD CROSS
NEAR FCI GOWDEN BRINDAVAN LAYOUT
BANGALORE NORTH
DOORVANINAGAR
BANGALORE NORTH
Digitally signed BANGALORE-560016.
by
DHANALAKSHMI ...APPELLANT
MURTHY
Location: High (BY SRI. RANGEGOWDA N R.,ADVOCATE)
Court of
Karnataka
AND:
1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD.,
T P HUB 6TH FLOOR
KRISHIBHAVAN BUILDING
HUDSON CIRCLE BANGALORE-560001
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER
2. B JANARDHAN
S/O LATE BETTAIAH
AGED MAJOR
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
MFA No. 6452 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 6461 of 2022
R/AT NO.2095 5TH MAIN
9TH CROSS, RPC LAYOUT
VIJAYANAGAR,
BANGALORE-560042.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.RAVISH BENNI., ADVOCATE FOR R1:
NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH
V/O DATED: 11.09.2023)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 21.07.2022
PASSED IN MVC NO. 3813/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE
MEMBER, MACT, C/c XVI ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF
SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU CITY (SCCH-14), PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA 6461/2022
BETWEEN:
J KALEEM PASHA
S/O SAIK JALAL SAB
NOW AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
R/AT NO.3, 3RD CROSS
NEAR FCI GOWDEN BRINDAVAN LAYOUT
BANGALORE NORTH
DOORVANINAGAR
BANGALORE NORTH
BANGALORE-560016.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RANGEGOWDA N R.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD.,
T P HUB 6TH FLOOR
KRISHIBHAVAN BUILDING
-3-
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
MFA No. 6452 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 6461 of 2022
HUDSON CIRCLE
BANGALORE-560001.
2. B JANARDHAN
S/O LATE BETTAIAH
AGED MAJOR
R/AT NO.2095 5TH MAIN
9TH CROSS, RPC LAYOUT
VIJAYANAGAR
BANGALORE-560042.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.RAVISH BENNI., ADVOCATE FOR R1:
NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH
V/O DATED: 6.12.2023)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 21.07.2022
PASSED IN MVC NO. 3812/2020 ON THE FILE OF THE
MEMBER, MACT, C/c XVI ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF
SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU CITY (SCCH-14), PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
1. These appeals under Section 173(1) of Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act')
have been filed by the claimants being aggrieved by the
judgment dated 21.07.2022 passed by MACT, Bengaluru in
MVC Nos.3812/2020 and 3813/2020.
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeals briefly
stated are that 09.10.2020 at about 11.00 p.m., the
claimants in both the appeals were proceeding in Honda
Dio Scooter bearing Registration No.KA-03-JW-8438 from
J.P.Nagar Avalahalli towards K.R.Puram and they reached
on 15th Cross Outer Ring Road, near More Shopping Mall,
J.P.Nagar, 3rd Phase, at that time, the driver of the Zen
Car bearing Registration No.KA-02-N-6241 drove the same
in a very high speed, rash and negligent manner and
dashed to the scooter. As a result of the aforesaid
accident, the claimants in both the appeals sustained
grievous injuries and were hospitalized.
3. The claimants filed claim petitions under Section 166
of the Act seeking compensation. It was pleaded that they
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 driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
4. On service of notice, the respondent No.1 appeared
through counsel and filed written statement in which the
averments made in the petition were denied. It was
pleaded that the petitions themselves are false and
frivolous in the eye of law. The age, avocation and income
of the claimants and the medical expenses are denied. It
was further pleaded that the quantum of compensation
claimed by the claimants is exorbitant. Hence, he sought
for dismissal of the petition.
The respondent No.2 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 in MVC No.3812/2020 was
examined as PW-1, The claimant in MVC No.3813/2020
was examined as PW-2 and Dr.Nagaraj B.N. was examined
as PW-3 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
Ex.P20. On behalf of the respondents, neither examined
any witness nor exhibited any document. 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 claimants in both the appeals sustained
injuries. The Tribunal further held that the claimant in MVC
No.3813/2020 is entitled to a compensation of
Rs.5,52,820/- and claimant in MVC No.3812/2020 is
entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,90,940/- 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 appeals have been
filed.
IN MFA NO.6452/2022 (MVC No.3813/2020)
6. The learned counsel for the claimant has raised the
following contentions:
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
a) Firstly, the claimant has examined the doctor as
PW-3. The doctor in his evidence has stated that the
claimant has suffered disability at 30% to the whole body.
But the Tribunal has taken the whole body disability at
6%, which is on the lower side.
b) Secondly, due to the accident, the claimant has
sustained grievous injuries. He was treated as inpatient for
a period of 4 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.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the
Insurance Company has raised following counter
contentions:
a) Firstly, the injuries suffered by the claimant are
minor in nature. He has examined the doctor as PW-3. But
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
PW-3 is not a treated doctor. He has not assessed limb
disability but he has assessed the disability only to the
whole body. The Tribunal considering the injuries
sustained by the claimant and evidence of the doctor, has
rightly assessed the whole body disability at 6%.
b) Secondly, 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.
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 09.10.2020
due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle
by its driver.
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
10. The Tribunal after considering the material available
on record, age, avocation of the claimant, has rightly
assessed the monthly income of the claimant as
Rs.14,500/-.
11. Due to the accident, the claimant has sustained L3
burst compression fracture and he underwent D-12 to L2
and other injuries. The doctor in his evidence has stated
that the claimant has suffered disability 30% to whole
body. Therefore, taking into consideration the deposition
of the doctor and injuries mentioned in the wound
certificate, I am of the opinion that the whole body
disability is assessed at 10%. The claimant is aged about
21 years at the time of the accident and multiplier
applicable to his age group is '18'. Thus, the claimant is
entitled for compensation of Rs.3,13,200/-
(Rs.14,500*12*18*10%) on account of 'loss of future
income'.
- 10 -
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
12. The nature of injuries suggests that the claimant
must have been under rest and treatment for a period of
2 months. Therefore, the claimant is entitled for
compensation of Rs.29,000/- (Rs.14,500*2 months)
under the head 'loss of income during laid up period'.
13. The claimant was treated as inpatient for more than
4 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.8,000/- to Rs.13,000/-.
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.30,000/- to Rs.40,000/-
- 11 -
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
and under the head of 'loss of amenities' from Rs.20,000/-
to Rs.30,000/-.
15. Considering the nature of injuries, the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is just and
reasonable.
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 30,000 40,000
Medical expenses 2,92,400 2,92,400
Food, nourishment, 8,000 13,000
conveyance and
attendant charges
Loss of income during 14,500 29,000
laid up period
Loss of amenities 20,000 30,000
Loss of future income 1,87,920 3,13,200
Total 5,52,820 7,17,600
- 12 -
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
IN MFA NO.6461/2022 (MVC No.3812/2020)
17. The learned counsel for the claimant has raised the
following contentions:
a) Firstly, the claimant has examined the doctor as PW-
3. The doctor in his evidence has stated that the claimant
has suffered disability of 29% to particular limb and 10%
to whole body. But the Tribunal has taken the whole body
disability at 5%, which is on the lower side.
b) Secondly, due to the accident, the claimant has
sustained grievous injuries. He was treated as inpatient for
a period of 5 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.
- 13 -
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
18. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the
Insurance Company has raised following counter
contentions:
a) Firstly, even though the doctor has assessed the limb
disability at 29%, the Tribunal considering the injuries
sustained by the claimant and evidence of the doctor, has
rightly assessed the whole body disability at 5%.
b) Secondly, 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.
19. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.
20. It is not in dispute that the claimant has sustained
injuries in the road traffic accident occurred on 09.10.2020
- 14 -
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle
by its driver.
21. As per wound certificate, the claimant has sustained
L3 compression fracture, right clavicle mid 1/3 (minimally
displaced) fracture and scapula neck fracture. The doctor
in his evidence has stated that the claimant has suffered
disability of 29% to particular limb and 10% to whole
body. Therefore, taking into consideration the deposition
of the doctor and injuries mentioned in the wound
certificate, I am of the opinion that the whole body
disability is assessed at 9%. The claimant is aged about 51
years at the time of the accident and multiplier applicable
to his age group is '11'. Thus, the claimant is entitled for
compensation of Rs.1,72,260/- (Rs.14,500*12*11*9%)
on account of 'loss of future income'.
22. The nature of injuries suggests that the claimant
must have been under rest and treatment for a period of
2 months. Therefore, the claimant is entitled for
- 15 -
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
compensation of Rs.29,000/- (Rs.14,500*2 months)
under the head 'loss of income during laid up period'.
23. The claimant was treated as inpatient for more than
5 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.8,000/- to Rs.13,000/-.
24. 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.30,000/- to Rs.40,000/-
and under the head of 'loss of amenities' from Rs.15,000/-
to Rs.30,000/-.
- 16 -
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
25. Considering the nature of injuries, the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is just and
reasonable.
26. 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 30,000 40,000
Medical expenses 27,740 27,740
Food, nourishment, 8,000 13,000
conveyance and
attendant charges
Loss of income during 14,500 29,000
laid up period
Loss of amenities 15,000 30,000
Loss of future income 95,700 1,72,260
Total 1,90,940 3,12,000
27. In the result, the following order is passed:
- 17 -
NC: 2023:KHC:44037
ORDER
a) The appeals are allowed in part.
b) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
c) The claimant in MVC No.3813/2020 is entitled to a
total compensation of Rs.7,17,600/- and the
claimant in MVC No.3812/2020 is entitled to a total
compensation of Rs.3,12,000/-.
d) 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
HA
