Karnataka High Court
Narasappa Maruti Malagi @ Channadasar vs Mallkarjun Guruputrappa Langoti on 22 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6616
MFA No. 101252 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101252 OF 2018 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
NARASAPPA MARUTI MALAGI @ CHANNADASAR,
AGE: 15 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT,
R/O. DHAVALESHWAR, NOW AT HANUMAN NAGAR,
SONOLI, TQ: BELAGAVI.
MINOR, R/BY HIS NEXT FRIEND NATURAL FATHER,
MARUTI PARASAPPA MALAGI @ CHANNADASAR
AGE: 46 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. DHAVALESHWAR, NOW AT HANUMAN NAGAR,
SONOLI, TQ: BELAGAVI-590010.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. GEETHA K. M, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MALLKARJUN GURUPUTRAPPA LANGOTI,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUISNESS,
R/O. KITTUR, DIST: BELAGAVI.
Digitally
signed by
JAGADISH T R 2. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD,
Location:
HIGH COURT
NO.3128, CHAMPA BUILDING,
OF
KARNATAKA
KHADE BAZAR, BELAGAVI,
REPRESENTED BY DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI-590002.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. VISHWANATH V. BADIGER, ADV. FOR R1)
(SMT.PREETI SHASHANK, ADV. FOR R2)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,
1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 05.02.2018
PASSED IN MVC NO.2475/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT
OF COMPENSATION.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6616
MFA No. 101252 of 2018
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the
consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for
final disposal.
2. This appeal is filed by the claimant/injured seeking
enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the
judgment and award dated 5.2.2018 passed in MVC
No.2475/2016 on the file of IX Addl. District and Sessions
Judge and Addl. MACT, Belagavi (for short, 'Tribunal').
3. I have heard the learned counsel Smt. Geeta K.M.
for the appellant/injured and learned counsel Smt. Preeti
Shashank for the respondent/Insurance Company.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
Tribunal has committed an error in not appreciating the
evidence available on record in a proper perspective. She
submits that PW2-doctor has deposed before the Tribunal that
the appellant has sustained disability to an extent of 25% due
to fractural injuries. Hence, she seeks to re-assess the same
appropriately. She further submits that the award of
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6616
compensation by the Tribunal under the other heads are also
on the lower side. Hence, she seeks to award the compensation
as per law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Master Mallikarjun Vs. Divisional Manager, National
Insurance Company Limited & Another1 by allowing the
appeal.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent/Insurer
supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal
and submits that the appellant has sustained 25% disability,
hence, disability assessed by the Tribunal is just and proper
and does not call for interference. She further submits that the
appellant is a minor and even after the accidental injuries, he is
continuing his studies, hence, disability cannot be assessed
more than what is assessed by the Tribunal. Hence, she seeks
dismissal of the appeal.
6. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for
the parties and perused the material available on record.
7. It is not in dispute that on 14.10.2015, the
appellant/injured, who was a minor aged about 12 years at the
2014(14) SCC 396
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6616
time of the accident, sustained depressed fracture of frontal
bone of skull and undisplay fracture of left parietal bone of
skull. Taking note of the aforesaid injuries suffered by the
appellant and also medical evidence available on record, this
Court is of the considered view that it would be just and
appropriate to re-assess the disability of the appellant at 11%
for the purpose of determining the compensation. Keeping in
mind the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case
of Master Mallikarjun, this Court holds that the
appellant/claimant is entitled to a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- under
the head of pain and suffering, loss of earning capacity and loss
of amenities etc. Due to the injuries sustained, the
appellant/injured was an inpatient for a period of 11 days and
in that period, the parents of the appellant/claimant were in the
hospital to look after the appellant/claimant, hence, it would be
just and appropriate to award a sum of Rs.24,000/-
(Rs.8,000 x 3 months) under the head of loss of income of
parent during treatment period of the appellant. The Tribunal
awarded a sum of Rs.31,173/- towards medical expenses,
which is unaltered. Thus, in all, the claimant would be entitled
to total compensation of Rs.3,55,173/- as against
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6616
Rs.1,36,173/- awarded by the Tribunal. The insurance
company shall deposit the enhanced 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 released in favour of the appellant.
8. In modification of the impugned judgment and
award of the Tribunal to the aforesaid extent, the appeal stands
partly allowed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
JTR
Ct-an
