Karnataka High Court
Nagaraj S/O Yanjarappa vs N.S Manjunatha S/O Sharanappa on 3 April, 2024
Author: Jyoti Mulimani
Bench: Jyoti Mulimani
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:13718
MFA No. 9653 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.9653 OF 2010(MV)
BETWEEN:
NAGARAJ
S/O YANJARAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS,
AGRICULTURIST AND COOLIE,
R/O KANAJANAHALLY, HIRIYUR TALUK,
REPRESENTED BY PA HOLDER,
SHARADAMMA W/O NAGARAJA,
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
COOLIE, R/O KANAJANAHALLY,
HIRIYUR TALUK.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GANESH GOWDA., ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. GANAPATHI BHAT VAJRALLI., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. N.S.MANJUNATHA
Digitally signed by
THEJASKUMAR N S/O SHARANAPPA,
Location: HIGH AGE: MAJOR,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING
NO.KA-F-34-K-3954, R/AT 6TH CROSS,
RIGHT SIDE, SRMV SAGAR, BELLARY.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER,
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
CHITRADURGA.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. C.R.RAVISHANKAR., ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1-HELD SUFFICIENT V/O DATED:02.02.2015)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:13718
MFA No. 9653 of 2010
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:20.07.2010
PASSED IN MVC NO.354/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, ADDITIONAL MACT, HIRIYUR.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR
FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Sri.Ganesh Gowda., learned counsel on behalf of
Sri.Kumar and Bhat., for the appellant and
Sri.C.R.Ravishankar., learned counsel for respondent No.2 have
appeared in person.
2. Notice to respondents was ordered on 22.08.2011.
A perusal of the office note depicts that respondent No.1 is held
sufficient vide order dated:02.02.2015. He has neither engaged
the services of an advocate nor conducted the case as an party
in person.
3. The claimant has assailed the Judgment of the
Tribunal in this appeal on several grounds as setout in the
Memorandum of appeal.
4. Learned counsel for the respective parties have
urged several contentions. Heard, the contentions urged on
NC: 2024:KHC:13718
behalf of the respective parties and perused the appeal papers
and the records with utmost care.
5. The point that requires consideration is whether the
Judgment of the Tribunal requires interference.
6. Suffice it to note that the Tribunal has awarded
compensation and directed the first respondent to pay the
entire compensation amount. The Insurance Company was
exonerated from its liability. The material on record indicates
that the Tribunal has committed an error in not awarding
adequate compensation in favor of the claimant towards pain
and suffering, medical expenses and also loss of amenities.
Having regard to the grievous and serious nature of the
injuries sustained by the claimant in the accident, I am of the
considered opinion that the claimant is entitled to additional
enhanced compensation of Rs.65,000/- as hereunder:
1 Pain and Suffering Rs.20,000/-
2 Towards medical expenses Rs.20,000/-
3 Loss of amenities Rs.25,000/-
TOTAL Rs.65,000/-
NC: 2024:KHC:13718
The Tribunal extenso referred to the material on record
and rightly fastened the liability on the owner of the offending
vehicle. In my opinion, the said finding is just and proper. I find
no reasons to interfere with the said finding. Therefore, the
owner of the offending vehicle is directed to satisfy the award
of the Tribunal.
7. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I pass the
following:-
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated
20.07.2010 passed in MVC No.354/2007, by the
Senior Civil Judge and Addl. MACT, Hiriyur is
modified by enhancing the compensation amount in
a sum of Rs.65,000/- (Rupees Sixty Five Thousand
only) which shall carry interest at 6% per annum
from the date of petition, till the date of realization.
(iii) The aforesaid enhanced compensation amount
of Rs.65,000/- (Rupees Sixty Five Thousand only)
NC: 2024:KHC:13718
together with interest shall be deposited by the
respondent No.1/ owner of the offending vehicle
within a period of two months from the date of
receipt of copy of this order before the Tribunal and
the Tribunal shall release the entire amount in favor
of the appellant.
Sd/-
JUDGE
MRP
