Karnataka High Court
Devendra S/O Hanamant Divatagi vs Vasant Siddappa Patrut on 2 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6043
MFA No. 103896 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103896 OF 2015 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
DEVENDRA S/O. HANAMANT DIVATAGI,
AGE: 24 YEARS, OCC: NOW NIL,
(STUDENT MILK VENDING & AGRICULTURE),
ARATAGAL VILLAGE, TAL: SAUNDATTI,
DIST: BELAGAVI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. SUNANDA P. PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. VASANT SIDDAPPA PATRUT,
AGE: 41 YEARS, OCC: CHINCHALI,
TAL: RAIBAG, DIST: BELAGAVI.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
Digitally signed THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD,
by ROHAN SHANBAG CHAMBERS, 5TH FLOOR,
HADIMANI T
Location: HIGH KIRLOSKAR ROAD, BELAGAVI,
COURT OF DIST: BELAGAVI.
KARNATAKA
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. G. N. RAICHUR, ADV. FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF
MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND
MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD IN M.V.C NO.2965/2012
DATED 29-09-2014 PASSED BY THE LEARNED THE SENIOR CIVIL
JUDGE & ADDL. MACT SAUNDATTI UNDER ALL PERMISSIBLE HEADS.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6043
MFA No. 103896 of 2015
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 injured/claimant
seeking enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by
the judgment and award dated 29.09.2014 passed in
MVC.No.2965/2012 by the Senior Civil Judge and Addl.
MACT, Saundatti (for short, 'Tribunal').
3. Heard Smt.Sunanda P.Patil, learned counsel for
the appellant and Sri.G.N.Raichur, learned counsel for the
respondent No.2-Insurance Company.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
the Tribunal has committed grave error in awarding total
compensation of Rs.91,500/- to the appellant-injured, who
was minor aged about 16 years at the time of accident.
She submits that the appellant has suffered serious
fracture and the treated doctor PW-2 has entered witness
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6043
box and deposed that the appellant has sustained 33%
disability. Hence, she seeks to reassess the disability as
well as the income and to award appropriate
compensation.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-
Insurance Company opposed the appeal and submits that
the Tribunal is justified in awarding compensation of
Rs.91,500/- considering the injuries suffered by the
appellant. He submits that PW-2, though is the treated
doctor, has a habit of issuing higher disability to the
injured-claimants. He further submits that the disability
assessed by the doctor is not to the whole body, but it is
partial disability and hence, seeks to dismiss the appeal.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the
appellant and learned counsel for the respondent-
insurance company and perused the material available on
record.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6043
7. It is not in dispute that in the road accident that
occurred on 31.12.2006, the appellant who was a minor
aged about 16 years as on the date of accident, sustained
grievous injuries. PW-2 who was the treated doctor,
entered witness box and also issued disability certificate as
per Ex.P-11 and has given opinion that the appellant has
sustained fracture of right thigh, right femur, abrasion on
right thigh, abrasion over right knee, abrasion over right
leg, abrasion over left leg, abrasion over face, abrasion
over both hand etc. Taking note of the aforesaid injuries
and the oral testimony of the treated doctor, this Court re-
assesses the disability at 30% for the purpose of
determination of compensation. This Court applying the
ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Mallikarjurn V. Divisional Manager, National
Insurance Co. Ltd. and another1, awards compensation
of Rs.3,00,000/- under the head pain & suffering, loss of
amenities and loss of future income due to disability. The
2013 ACJ 2445
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6043
appellant is entitled to Rs.11,250/- under the head of
loss of income during laid-up period of the minor guardian.
The appellant is also entitled to Rs.19,000/- towards
medical expenses. Thus, in all, the appellant-injured shall
be entitled to modified compensation of Rs.3,30,250/-
(Rs.3,00,000 + 11,250 + 19,000).
8. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the
following :
ORDER
a) Appeal stands allowed in part.
b) The impugned judgment and award of the
Tribunal is modified to an extent that the
claimant would be entitled to total
compensation of Rs.3,30,250/- as
against Rs.91,500/- awarded by the
Tribunal.
c) The enhanced compensation amount shall
carry interest at the rate of 6% per
annum from the date of petition till the
date of payment excluding the interest for
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6043
the delayed period of 355 days as per the
order dated 24.10.2017.
d) The Insurance Company shall deposit the
enhanced compensation amount with
accrued interest before the Tribunal within
a period of six weeks from the date of
receipt of certified copy of this judgment.
e) The apportionment, deposit and
disbursement shall be made as per award
of the Tribunal.
f) Draw modified award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
BSR
Ct-an
