Karnataka High Court
Sharanappa vs Mallikarjun And Anr on 19 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3079
MFA No. 203788 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 203788 OF 2023 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SHARANAPPA S/O GUNDAPPA,
AGE: 56 YEARS,
OCC: AGRICULTURE (NOW NIL),
R/O. MALAGATTI VILLAGE,
TQ: CHITTAPUR,
NOW AT RESIDENCE OF
H.NO.912-42, CBI COLONY,
KALABURAGI585 211.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI NAGARAJ PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally
signed by
SACHIN 1. MALLIKARJUN S/O SIDDAPPA,
Location:
HIGH COURT AGE: MAJOR, OCC: NOT KNOWN,
OF
KARNATAKA OWNER OF HERO MOTORCYCLE
BEARING NO. KA-32/EF-4435,
R/O. SHANKARWADI,
TQ: CHITTAPUR,
DIST: KALABURAGI-585 211.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LIMITED,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
N.G. COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR,
OPP. MINI VIDHANA SOUDHA,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3079
MFA No. 203788 of 2023
KALABURAGI-585 102.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI NARENDRA M. REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI MANVENDRA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R-2;
V/O DTD. 01.04.2024 NOTICE TO R-1 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO
MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 23.11.2018
PASSED IN MVC NO.874/2017 ON THE FILE OF PRL. SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT AT KALABURAGI AND ALLOW THIS
APPEAL BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT OF
RS.12,14,360/- ONLY AS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE
THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri Nagaraj Patil, learned counsel for the
appellant as well as Sri Narendra M.Reddy, learned
counsel who is representing Sri Manvendra Reddy, learned
counsel on record for respondent No.2. Notice to
respondent No.1 stood dispensed with.
2. Seeking a higher sum as compensation the
claimant in M.V.C.No.874/2017 that stood pending before
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kalaburagi is before
this Court by way of this appeal challenging the order
dated 23.11.2018.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3079
3. Submitting that the appellant sustained
grievous injuries due to the accident and became
permanently disabled, learned counsel Sri Nagaraj
contends that the Tribunal failed to appreciate the
evidence of PW.2 in proper perspective. Learned counsel
submits that PW.2 gave evidence to the effect that the
disability is 29% in respect of the upper limb and whole
body, but the Tribunal took the disability as 9% which is
erroneous. Learned counsel also states that the appellant
as an agricultural labourer was earning Rs.15,000/- per
month by the date of accident, but the Tribunal took the
notional income as Rs.8,000/- which is improper. Learned
counsel further contends that the amount awarded as
compensation under all heads is grossly low. The
submission made by Sri Narendra M.Reddy on the other
hand is that the Tribunal taking into consideration all the
aspects of the case awarded a just sum as compensation
and thus the appeal requires dismissal.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3079
4. The appellant by producing cogent and
convincing evidence established that he sustained fracture
of left olecranon, fracture of left clavicle, fracture of distal
end of left radius which are grievous in nature. However,
the Tribunal by subjecting the entire evidence into scrutiny
has come to a just conclusion that the disability in respect
of whole body would be not more than 9%. This Court is of
the view that the observation thus made is justifiable.
5. Coming to the aspect of earnings, though no
substantive proof is produced with regard to the actual
occupation and earnings as on the date of accident, yet
the fact that has to be considered is that the Karnataka
State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional
income as Rs.10,250/- for settling the matters in respect
of the accidents that occurred in the year 2017. Therefore,
this Court considers desirable to adopt the said figure for
calculating the compensation.
6. It is not in dispute that the appellant was aged
about 54 years by the date of accident. Therefore, as per
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3079
the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay
Sethi and others reported in (2017) 16 SCC 680, 10%
of the earnings have to be added towards future
prospects. Without disturbing the other parameters i.e.,
multiplier to be '11' and the disability as 9%, the
entitlement of the appellant for compensation under the
head 'loss of earnings due to permanent disability' would
Rs.1,33,947/- (Rs.10,250/- + 10% X 12 X 11 X 9%).
7. Having considered the nature of injuries
sustained, this Court is of the view that the appellant
would not have attended his normal pursuits atleast for a
period of four months. Therefore, 'loss of earnings during
laid-up period' comes to Rs.41,000/- (Rs.10,250/-X4).
Also there is requirement of marginal enhancement in
respect of the amount awarded under the head pain,
shock and agony and also food, diet and other incidental
expenses. Thus, the compensation which the appellant
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3079
would be entitled to under different heads would be as
under :-
Sl. Compensation awarded by
Heads
No. Tribunal This Court
1. Pain, shock and agony Rs.60,000/- Rs.80,000/-
2. Medical expenses Rs.52,600/- Rs.52,600/-
3. Food, diet, nourishment, Rs.7,000/- Rs.20,000/-
conveyance, and other
incidental expenses
4. Future medical expenses Rs.25,000/- Rs.25,000/-
5. Loss of income during Rs.16,000/- Rs.41,000/-
treatment period
6. Loss of income towards Rs.95,040/- Rs.1,33,947/-
permanent disability
7. Disappointment and Rs.30,000/- Rs.30,000/-
discomfort and loss of
amenities
Total Rs.2,85,640/-
Rs.2,85,640/- Rs.3,82,54
Rs.3,82,547/-
8. In light of the foregoing discussion, the
following :
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed in part.
ii) The amount awarded as compensation by
the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Kalaburagi through orders in
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3079
M.V.C.No.874/2017 dated 23.11.2018 is
enhanced from Rs.2,85,640/- to
Rs.3,82,547/-.
iii. The enhanced amount shall carry interest
at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of
petition till the date of deposit except for
the period of delay of 949 days in
preferring the appeal as per orders in
I.A.No.1/2023 dated 01.04.2024.
iv. The second respondent is directed to
deposit the enhanced amount with interest
within a period of eight weeks from the
date of receipt of copy of this order.
v. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted
to withdraw the entire amount.
Sri Manvendra Reddy, learned counsel is granted
time for two weeks to file Vakalath.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SN
