Karnataka High Court
Banu Prakash vs Nagaraju on 23 November, 2023
Author: H.T. Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T. Narendra Prasad
-1-
NC: 2023:KHC:42267
MFA No. 2094 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2094 OF 2021 (MV)
BETWEEN:
BANU PRAKASH
S/O BASAVARAJU
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
R/AT KURUBARAHALLI WARD NO.22
CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TOWN
TUMKUR DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. JAGADISH H T., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. NAGARAJU
S/O GANGAMMA
AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS
R/AT BAGGANAHALLI VILLAGE
Digitally signed
by SHETTIKERE HOBLI
DHANALAKSHMI CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI TALUK
MURTHY
TUMKUR DISTRICT.
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka 2. IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
BRANCH OFFICE AT MBAV MANSION
1ST FLOOR 3RD CROSS, M G ROAD
ABOVE UCO BANK
GENERAL KARIYAPPA ROAD, TUMKUR.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.C.SHANKAR REDDY., ADVOCATE FOR R2:
NOTICE TO R1 IS D/W V/O DATED: 03.06.2022)
-2-
NC: 2023:KHC:42267
MFA No. 2094 of 2021
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 06.01.2021
PASSED IN MVC NO. 1376/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND XIX MACT, JMFC,
CHIKKANAYAKANAHALLI, 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 06.01.2021 passed by MACT, Chikkanayakanahalli in
MVC No.1376/2018.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly
stated are that on 30.07.2018 at about 11.30 a.m., the
claimant was going on his motor bike bearing Registration
No.KA-44-S-6581 on the left side of the road and when he
was near GMR Kalyana Mantapa, Shyavigehalli gate on
NC: 2023:KHC:42267
NH-150-A, at that time, the rider of the Honda Activa
bearing Registration No.KA-44-U-3225 drove the same in
a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the
claimant's bike. 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
NC: 2023:KHC:42267
by the claimant is exorbitant. Hence, they sought for
dismissal of the petition.
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.Savitha H. N. was examined as PW-2 and
Dr.Kirankumar was examined as PW-3 and got exhibited
documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P72. 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 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.3,49,758/-
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 appeal
has been filed.
NC: 2023:KHC:42267
6. The learned counsel for the claimant has raised the
following contentions:
a) Firstly, even though the claimant claims that he was
doing agricultural work, carpenter and running a pani puri
stall and earning Rs.40,000/- per month, but the Tribunal
has taken the notional income as merely as Rs.10,000/-
p.m.
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.
NC: 2023:KHC:42267
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.40,000/- 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, the injuries suffered by the claimant are
minor in nature. 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.
NC: 2023:KHC:42267
9. It is not in dispute that the claimant has sustained
injuries in the road traffic accident occurred on 30.07.2018
due to rash and negligent riding of the offending vehicle
by its rider.
10. The claimant claims that he was earning Rs.40,000/-
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 2018, the notional
income has to be taken at Rs.12,500/- p.m.
11. As per wound certificate, the claimant has sustained
comminuted left tibial condyle fracture. The Tribunal after
taking into consideration the deposition of the doctor and
injuries mentioned in the wound certificate, has rightly
taken the whole body disability at 10%. The claimant is
aged about 23 years at the time of the accident and
multiplier applicable to his age group is '18'. Thus, the
NC: 2023:KHC:42267
claimant is entitled for compensation of Rs.2,70,000/-
(Rs.12,500*12*18*10%) 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
2 months. Therefore, the claimant is entitled for
compensation of Rs.25,000/- (Rs.12,500*2 months)
under the head 'loss of income during laid up period'.
13. Due to the accident, the claimant has suffered
grievous injuries and also undergone surgery. He was
treated as inpatient for more than 4 days in the hospital.
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 expectation of life' from
Rs.20,000/- to Rs.40,000/-.
NC: 2023:KHC:42267
14. Considering the nature of injuries, the compensation
awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is just and
reasonable.
15. 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 73,758 73,758
Food, nourishment, 10,000 10,000
conveyance and
attendant charges
Loss of income during 0 25,000
laid up period
Loss of expectation of 20,000 40,000
life
Loss of future income 2,16,000 2,70,000
Total 3,49,758 4,58,758
- 10 -
NC: 2023:KHC:42267
16. In the result, the following order is passed:
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.4,58,758/-.
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
