N. Venkatesh vs Manjunmath H
2024 Latest Caselaw 10124 Kant

Karnataka High Court

N. Venkatesh vs Manjunmath H on 8 April, 2024

                                                  -1-
                                                                   NC: 2024:KHC-D:6257
                                                          MFA No. 103230 of 2016




                         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. 103230 OF 2016 (MV)
                   BETWEEN:

                   N. VENKATESH S/O. NARAYANAPPA,
                   AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: MECHANIC CUM,
                   TATA MOBILE SHOP OWNER
                   R/O. CHIKKERAHALLI VILLAGE,
                   TALUK: MOLAKIMURU-578130.
                                                                          ...APPELLANT
                   (BY SMT. SOUBHAGYA S. VAKKUND, ADV. FOR
                       SRI. Y. LAKSHMIKANT REDDY, ADVOCATE)
                   AND:

                   1.     MANJUNMATH H, S/O. GANGADHARAPPA H,
                          AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER OF THE
                          LORRY BEARING NO.KA-16/A-3765,
                          R/O. DUGGAVATHI POST, TALUK: HARAPANAHALLI,
                          DISTRICT: BALLARI.-583101.
                   2.     MOHAMMED ALI S/O. ABDUL RASHEED SAD,
                          AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: OWNER OF THE LORRY
Digitally signed          BEARING REG. NO.KA-16/A-3765,
by JAGADISH T R           M/S. MUBARAK TRANSPORT, GUNDERI,
Location: HIGH            TALUK: HOLALKERE, DISTRICT: CHITRADURGA-578130.
COURT OF
KARNATAKA          3.     THE BRANCH MANAGER,
                          IFFCO TOKIO, GENERAL INSURANCE CO.,
                          RAGHAVA KRISHNA COMPLEX,
                          1ST FLOOR, K. C. ROAD, BALLARI-583101.
                                                                       ...RESPONDENTS
                   (BY SRI. M. Y. KATAGI, ADV. FOR R3;
                       NOTICE TO R1 & R2 DISPENSED WITH)

                        THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF
                   MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND
                   AWARD DATED 12/04/2016 PASSED BY II MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
                   TRIBUNAL, AT BALLARI IN MVC NO.486/2014 BY ENHANCING THE
                   COMPENSATION TO THE APPELLANT AND ETC.
                                    -2-
                                                    NC: 2024:KHC-D:6257
                                             MFA No. 103230 of 2016




     THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                              JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the injured/claimant seeking

enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the

judgment and award dated 12.04.2016, passed in MVC

No.486/2014 on the file of Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal-II,

Ballari (for short, 'Tribunal').

2. Heard Sri.Soubhagya Vakkund learned counsel

appearing for the appellant 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

assessing the income of the claimant/injured and has awarded

meager compensation under the heads of loss of income during

laid-up period and loss of amenities. Hence, she seeks to allow

the appeal by enhancing the compensation.

4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the

respondent No.3/Insurance Company opposed the appeal and

submits that the Tribunal taking note of the evidence has

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6257

awarded just and fair compensation which does not call for any

enhancement. Hence he seeks to dismiss the appeal.

5. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel

appearing for the respective parties and perused the material

available on record.

6. It is not in dispute that the appellant was met with a

road accident on 27.10.2013 and sustained the fracture/injuries

i.e., lateral femoral condyle fracture of (left) femur with

crushing of Articular cartilage and TRICEPS avulsion injury (left)

Elbow. The Tribunal has committed grave error in assessing the

disability. The disability assessed by the doctor is at 25%. In

the instant case, there is only one fracture, hence, the disability

assessed by the Tribunal is on the higher side. Hence, this

Court is of the considered view that instead of reassessing the

income notionally at Rs.7,000/- per month and awarding the

compensation, this Court confirms the award of compensation

by the Tribunal under the head of loss of future income due to

disability. However, the appellant is entitled to Rs.21,000/-

under the head of loss of income during laid-up period and the

additional sum of Rs.20,000/- under the head of loss of

amenities. The award of compensation on the other heads is

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6257

unaltered. Thus, the appellant/claimant would be entitled to

enhanced compensation of Rs.41,000/-. The enhanced

compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum.

7. 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

claimant/injured. Draw modified award accordingly.

Sd/-

JUDGE

PMP Ct-an