Karnataka High Court
Shivanand Mallikarjun Pujar vs Krishna Kallappa Patil on 4 April, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6123
MFA No. 100080 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100080 OF 2014 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SHRI. SHIVANAND MALLIKARJUN PUJAR,
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE,
R/O. KODACHWAD, TQ: KHANAPUR,
DIST: BELGUAM.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SANJAY S. KATAGERI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI. KRISHNA KALLAPPA PATIL,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. KODACHWAD, TQ: KHANAPUR,
DIST: BELGAUM.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
Digitally signed by UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD,
JAGADISH T R MARUTI GALLI, BELGAUM.
Location: HIGH
COURT OF ...RESPONDENTS
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. N. R. KUPPELUR, ADV. FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 HELD SUFFICIENT)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD: 25.09.2013, PASSED IN
MVC.NO.1977/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENTS
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL KHANAPUR, DISMISSING THE CLAIM PETITION
FILED U/S. 166 OF MV ACT.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6123
MFA No. 100080 of 2014
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 appellant/claimant being
aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 25.09.2013
passed in MVC No.1977/2012 on the file of Senior Civil Judge
and Member, MACT, Khanapur (for short, 'Tribunal'), whereby
the claim petition was dismissed.
3. Heard the learned counsel Sri.Sanjay S Katageri for
the appellant/claimant and learned counsel Sri.N.R.Kuppelur for
the respondent/insurer.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
Tribunal has committed an error in dismissing the claim petition
on the ground that the appellant has failed to prove the alleged
accident as well as nexus between the accident and injuries
suffered by him. It is submitted that the Tribunal has recorded
a finding that there is delay of 2 days in filing the complaint
and MVI report indicates that there are no visible damages to
the offending motorcycle. On these two grounds, claim petition
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6123
was dismissed. He submits that the jurisdictional police have
filed charge sheet against the rider of the offending motorcycle,
who has pleaded guilty before the jurisdictional Court, which
clearly indicates that the appellant has sustained accidental
injuries. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal filed by the
claimant by awarding just and proper compensation. He
further submits that the appellant has sustained fracture of left
humerus, he was an inpatient for eight days and also
undergone surgery. It is also submitted that the appellant was
aged about 25 years at the time of the accident and an
agriculturist by avocation. Hence, he seeks to award
appropriate compensation taking note of the aforesaid facts.
5. Per contra, learned counsel Sri.N.R.Kuppelur for the
respondent/insurer supports the finding recorded by the
Tribunal and submits that MVI report at Ex.P6 is clear that
there are no visible damages to the offending motorcycle. It is
submitted that as per case of the claimant, rider of the
motorcycle rode the same in a high speed, rash and negligent
manner and caused the accident; if he has ridden the
motorcycle in a high speed and caused the accident, there
should have been damagers to his motorcycle. However, MVI
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6123
report does not indicate any damages caused to the offending
motorcycle. He argues that there is no explanation from the
claimant with regard to delay of two days in filing the
complaint. Hence, the Tribunal is justified in dismissing the
claim petition. It is submitted that, in alternate, if this Court
comes to a conclusion that the claim petition is required to be
allowed, then the compensation be awarded appropriately
taking note of the fact that the appellant has sustained only
one fracture. Hence, he seeks dismissal of the appeal.
6. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel
for the parties at length and perused the material available on
record including the Tribunal records.
7. It is the case of the appellant that on 28.10.2011,
near Ballari Nala, the rider of the motorcycle bearing
registration No.KA-26/L-3974 owned by respondent No.1, rode
the same in a high speed, rash and negligent manner and
dashed to the appellant/claimant, who was returning by walk
towards his motorcycle after attending nature call. Due to the
impact of the said accident, the appellant sustained fracture
resulting in disability. The material available on record
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6123
indicates that the appellant was shifted to Vijaya Ortho and
Trauma Centre, Belagavi. Ex.P7-Wound Certificate indicates
that the appellant/injured brought to the hospital on
28.10.2011 at 2.15 p.m. with the history of road accident. The
material available on record further indicates that the said
hospital sent intimation of RTA to the jurisdictional police i.e.
Camp Police Station, Belagavi, as is evident from the MLC
register bearing No.1774, dated 28.10.2011 and the said
document is part of the charge sheet papers. The said MLC
register available on record indicates that the PSHO, Camp
Police Station Belagavi has received the said intimation on
28.10.2011 itself. The material available on record also
indicates that the injured/claimant has furnished oral statement
to the jurisdictional police in the hospital and based on the said
statement, crime was registered and after investigation, the
charge sheet is filed against owner as well as rider of the
offending motorcycle. The charge sheet material indicates the
charge sheet is filed against rider of the offending motorcycle
for the offences punishable under Section 279 and 338 of IPC.
Ex.P7-Wound Certificate, MLC register extract, further
statement of the complainant and entire material on record
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6123
indicates that the rider of the offending motorcycle has caused
the accident in question. The finding of the Tribunal that there
is delay in registration of the complaint has no bearing with
regard to the accident in question for the aforesaid reasons.
8. Insofar as finding that there are no visible damages
to the offending motorcycle is concerned, Ex.P6-MVI report
though indicates that there are no visible damages to the
offending motorcycle, that should not be a sole basis to arrive
at a conclusion that the accident has not taken place on
28.10.2011 and there was no negligence on the part of the
rider of the motorcycle in question in view of filing of charge
sheet by the police. For the aforesaid reasons, the claim
petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned judgment and
award of the Tribunal.
9. Insofar as award of compensation, the appellant
was aged about 25 years and an agriculturist by avocation.
Hence, income is assessed notionally at Rs.6,000/- per month
placing reliance on the notional income chart prepared by the
KSLSA. PW2 and PW3, who have supported the case of the
claimant have deposed that the appellant has sustained
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6123
fracture of left humerus and opined that the disability is 35%.
Taking note of injuries suffered by the appellant and treatment
provided to him, it would be just and appropriate to assess the
disability of the appellant/claimant at 10%. Hence, loss of
future income due to disability is as under:
Rs.6,000 x 12 x 18 x 10% = Rs.1,29,600/-
10. The appellant is entitled to compensation on the
following heads:
Pain and suffering Rs. 40,000/-
Loss of amenities Rs. 30,000/-
Loss of future income due to disability Rs.1,29,600/-
Loss of income during laid-up period Rs. 18,000/-
Food, diet, nourishment & attendant Rs. 15,000/-
Medical expenses Rs. 22,690/-
------------------
Total Rs.2,55,290/-
------------------
11. Thus, the appellant is entitled to total compensation
of Rs.2,55,290/-, which shall carry interest at the rate of 6%
per annum from the date of petition till realization.
12. In the result, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
a) Appeal stands allowed.
b) The impugned judgment and award of the
Tribunal is set-aside. Consequently, the claim
petition is allowed in part.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:6123
c) The appellant/claimant is entitled to total
compensation of Rs.2,55,290/- with an
interest at the rate of 6% per annum from
the date of petition till realization.
d) The respondent/insurance company 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.
e) On such deposit, 50% of the compensation
amount shall be kept in fixed deposit in the
name of the appellant/claimant in any
nationalized bank for a period of three years
with liberty to the appellant to withdraw
periodical interest accrued thereon and
remaining 50% shall be released in favour of
the appellant/claimant on proper
identification.
f) Registry to draw award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
JTR
Ct-an
