Karnataka High Court
Balaram S/O Rajappa vs Rajmahammad S/O Ameersab on 8 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6263
MFA No. 103107 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103107 OF 2014 (MV)
BETWEEN:
BALARAM S/O. RAJAPPA,
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: MESON,
R/O. KOTTURESHWARA CAMP,
GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. M. M. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. RAJMAHAMMAD S/O. AMEERSAB,
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER OF CAR
BEARING ITS REGN.NO.KA-37M-3666,
R/O. HAMALARA COLONY, GANGAVATI, DIST: KOPPAL.
2. SHARANABASAPPA S, S/O. MALLAPPA,
AGE: 49 YEARS, OCC: OWNER OF CAR
BEARING ITS REGN.NO.KA-37/M-3666,
R/O. R.G.ROAD, GANGAVATHI, DIST: KOPPAL.
3. THE MANAGER, IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL
Digitally signed INSURANCE CO. LTD, 3RD FLOOR, K.S.C.M.F.
by JAGADISH T R BUILDING, IIIRD BLOCK, 8 CUNNIGHAM
Location: HIGH BANGALORE-52.
COURT OF ...RESPONDENTS
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. Y. LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADV. FOR R1;
SRI. B. SHARANABASAWA, ADV. FOR R2;
SRI. M. Y. KATAGI, ADV. FOR R3)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APEAL IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO ENHANCE THE
COMPENSATION AWARDED BY SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND M.A.C.T
GANGAVATHI IN M.V.C NO.106/2011 DATED 10.01.2013, BY
MODIFYING THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD FIXED THE
LIABILITY ON RESPONDENT NO.3 AND ALLOW THIS APPEAL WITH
COST IN THE INTEREST OF JUST AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6263
MFA No. 103107 of 2014
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the claimant/injured seeking
enhancement of compensation as well as saddling of
liability on the owner of the offending vehicle. This appeal
is arising out of the judgment and award dated
10.01.2013 passed in MVC No.106/2011 on the file of
Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Gangavathi (for short,
'Tribunal').
2. Heard Sri.M.M.Hiremath learned counsel
appearing for the appellant and Sri.Y.Lakshmikant Reddy
learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1/driver,
Sri.B.Sharanabasawa learned counsel appearing for the
respondent No.2/owner of the vehicle and Sri.M.Y.Katagi
learned counsel appearing for the respondent
No.3/Insurance Company.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the
appellant/claimant submits that the Tribunal has
committed grave error in saddling the liability on the
respondent No.2/owner of the car, on the ground that the
respondent No.1/driver was not having a valid and
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6263
effective driving license as on the date of accident. He
submits that the appellant/claimant has placed the copy of
the driving license along with a memo before this Court
and he further submits that the original driving license is
available for perusal of this Court. It is submitted that the
award of compensation by the Tribunal to the grievous
injuries sustained by the appellant is on the lower side.
Hence, he seeks to enhance the same appropriately by
allowing the appeal.
4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the
respondent No.3/Insurance Company and the other
respondents submits that despite of direction from the
Tribunal to produce the driving license, the claimants have
failed to do so, hence, the Tribunal has rightly saddled the
liability on the owner of the offending vehicle. It is
submitted that now the appellant/claimant has produced
the driving license of the respondent No.1/driver in this
appeal. It is also submitted that the appellant has not
examined any doctor nor placed on record the Disability
Certificate, hence, the award of compensation by the
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6263
Tribunal is just and proper does not call for any
modification or enhancement. Hence, he seeks to dismiss
the appeal.
5. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for
the respective parties. Perused the material available on
record.
6. It is not in dispute that the appellant had
sustained amputation of left 5th toe and 4th toe and also
sustained injuries on the other parts of the body due to
the road accident dated 13.02.2011. The appellant has
entered the witness box and deposed in support of his
claim petition, however, he has not examined any doctor
nor produced any documents with regard to the disability
except the Wound Certificate. Considering the nature of
injuries suffered by the appellant, this Court is of the
considered view that in the interest of justice, the
appellant/claimant would be entitled to an additional sum
of Rs.30,000/- as a global compensation. Thus, the
appellant would be entitled to modified compensation of
Rs.82,000/- (52,000 + 30,000). The enhanced
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6263
compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per
annum.
7. Insofar as finding of the Tribunal with regard to
the driving license is concerned, this Court perused the
Xerox copy of the driving license of the respondent No.2
on record and also perused the original driving license
which was made available during the course of the
argument and therefore this Court holds that the driver of
the vehicle in question was having valid and effective
driving license as on the date of accident. Hence, this
Court is of the considered view that the respondent
No.3/Insurance Company is liable to pay the entire
compensation amount.
8. It is noticed that this Court vide order dated
26.2.2024, while condoning the delay of 585 days in filing
the appeal, made an observation that the
appellant/claimant would not be entitled for interest for
the delayed period, in case if he succeeds in the appeal.
Hence, the claimant would not be entitled for the interest
on the enhanced compensation for the delayed period
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6263
9. To the aforesaid extent, the appeal is partly
allowed by modifying the impugned judgment and award
of the Tribunal. The respondent/Insurer shall deposit the
entire compensation amount with accrued interest before
the Tribunal within six weeks from the date of receipt of
certified copy of this judgment. On such deposit, the same
shall be paid to the appellant/injured. Draw modified
award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
PMP
Ct-an
