Karnataka High Court
Sri Raghvendra Shettigar vs Sri Raju Poojary @ Rajeeva on 5 January, 2023
Bench: M.I.Arun
-1-
MFA No. 1530 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.I.ARUN
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1530 OF 2020 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI RAGHVENDRA SHETTIGAR
S/O. BHASKAR SHETTIGAR,
AGEDA BOUT 33 YEARS,
R/O.RI DEVI PRASAD,
MUDKERI, BASRURU VILLAGE,
KUNDAPURA TALUK 576201
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. K.PRASANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by V
MANJUSHA BAI 1. SRI RAJU POOJARY @ RAJEEVA
Location: High
Court of AGED ABOUT 44 YARS,
Karnataka
S/O.RAMA POOJARY,
R/AT DOOR NO.1-91,
HERIKERI, GUNDADI,
KUNDAVARA VILLAGE,
KUNDAPURA TALUK-576201,
ALSO RESIDING AT BAILUMANE GUNDIGOLI,
BASRURU VILLAGE,
KUNDAPURA TALUK 576201
2. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGR,
BRANCH OFFICE KUNDAPURA BRANCH,
1ST FLOOR, PUSHPA BUILDING,
MAIN ROAD, KUNDAPURA TALUK-576201
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. C.SHANKAR REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
VIDE ORDER DATED 05.01.2023 NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W)
-2-
MFA No. 1530 of 2020
THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.06.06.2019 PASSED IN MVC
NO.66/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, UDUPI, (SITTING AT
KUNDAPURA), KUNDAPURA, PARTLY 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
1. Aggrieved by the order dated 06.06.2019 in
M.V.C.No.66/2018 passed by Additional District Judge and
Addl. MACT, Udupi (Sitting at Kundapura), Kundapura,
petitioner therein has preferred the present appeal.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to
as per their status before the Tribunal.
3. On 17.09.2017 at about 4.00 pm., the petitioner while
traveling from Basrur to Kundapura as a pillion rider on
motor cycle bearing registration No.KA.20.30.0336 near Sri
Mahalingeshwara Petrol Bunk at Basrur met with an accident
with another motor cycle bearing registration
No.KA.19.W.1478 belonging to respondent No.1 and duly
MFA No. 1530 of 2020
insured by respondent No.2. Accident is said to have
happened due to rash and negligent driving of motor cycle
bearing registration No.KA.19.W.1478. Hence, he preferred
MVC No.66/2018 and the Tribunal based on the evidence led
has awarded a compensation of Rs.3,77,700/- with interest
at the rate of 6% p.a. Not satisfied with the same, the
petitioner has preferred this appeal.
4. Accident took place on 17.09.2017. Petitioner was aged
32 years at the time of accident. Petitioner has suffered the
following injury due to the accident: Reddish contusion of
7cm.x6m on the left side of head with CT scan showing
bilateral frontal contusion with left temporal lobe contusion
with brainstem contusion.
Petitioner is employed as an electrician and plumber.
However, his income is not established before the Tribunal.
Hence the same has to be taken at Rs.11,000/- per month
as per the chart of the Lok Adalat. Further, PW.3-Doctor has
opined that there is 10% permanent body disability due to
the injury. However, the doctor admits that there is no
MFA No. 1530 of 2020
impediment for the petitioner to continue the work he was
doing. Thus, there is no functional disability to the petitioner
due the accident. Hence, Tribunal has not granted any
compensation towards loss of future income. I do not find
any error in the same.
5. Tribunal has granted a sum of Rs.80,000/- towards
injury, pain and suffering. The evidence also discloses that
the petitioner was forced to take five months bed rest due to
the injury. Given the nature of the injury, I deem it
appropriate to increase the compensation under the head
injury, pain and suffering to Rs.1,25,000/-. Based on the
bills submitted, Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,48,501/-
towards medical expenses. I deem it just and fair. Towards
loss of earning during treatment and loss due to bed rest
Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.4,200/- and Rs.45,000/-
respectively. As notional income of the petitioner has to be
taken at Rs.11,000/-, I deem it appropriate to award a sum
of Rs.55,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period
instead of heads loss of earning during treatment and bed
MFA No. 1530 of 2020
rest. Towards loss of amenities, Tribunal has awarded a sum
of Rs.80,000/-. I deem it appropriate, given the nature of
the injury to award a sum of Rs.1,25,000/-. Towards
conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges, a sum of
Rs.20,000/- has been awarded. I deem it appropriate to
award a sum of Rs.30,000/- under the said head. Thus,
petitioner would be entitled to a sum of Rs.4,83,501/- as
against Rs.3,77,700/- awarded by the Tribunal. Hence, the
following:
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed in part.
ii) The total compensation awarded by the Tribunal
is modified and the petitioner is entitled to
enhanced compensation of Rs.1,05,801/- over
and above what has been already awarded by
the Tribunal along with interest at the rate of
6% per annum from the date of filing of the
petition before the Tribunal till the date of
realization;
MFA No. 1530 of 2020
iii) Respondent No.2-insurance company shall be
liable to pay the compensation amount along
with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from
the date of filing of the petition before the
Tribunal till the date of realization within a
period of six weeks from the date of receipt of
certified copy of this order;
iv) Compensation to be paid by the insurance
company shall be after deducting the amount
already paid/deposited to the petitioner.
v) Further, the petitioner shall not be entitled to
interest on the enhanced compensation for the
delayed period of 100 days in filing the appeal;
vi) Draw modified award accordingly;
vii) Registry to return the records to the
jurisdictional Tribunal forthwith.
Sd/-
JUDGE
PGG
