Karnataka High Court
Smt. Akkayamma vs The Managing Director, Central Bus ... on 2 August, 2024
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:30714
MFA No. 3617 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3617 OF 2021 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SMT.AKKAYAMMA
W/O.CHIKKAPILLAPPA
AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS
R/AT HOUSE NO.96
GOPASANDRA
SARJAPURA HOBLI
ANEKAL TALUK
BENGALURU DISTRICT
Digitally ...APPELLANT
signed by B
LAVANYA (BY SRI K.V.NAIK, ADVOCATE)
Location:
HIGH AND:
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR
CENTRAL BUS STATION
DOUBLE ROAD
SHANTHINAGAR
BENGALURU-560 027
...RESPONDENT
(BY SMT.RADHA B.P., ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
20.01.2020 PASSED IN MVC.NO.217/2018 ON THE FILE OF I
ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND MACT, BENGALURU.
[
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:30714
MFA No. 3617 of 2021
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by the appellant-claimant
challenging the judgment and award dated 20.01.2020
passed in MVC.No.217/2018 on the file of I Additional
Small Causes Judge and MACT, Bengaluru (for short 'the
tribunal'). This appeal is founded on the premise of
inadequate and meager compensation awarded by the
tribunal.
2. Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as per
their status before the tribunal.
3. The tribunal has awarded total compensation of
Rs.1,09,600/- with interest at 9% per annum and directed
the respondent-Corporation to pay the compensation.
4. It is the vehement contention of learned counsel
for the appellant that the tribunal, ignoring the materials
placed on record, both oral and documentary, has not
taken the proper income and the disability assessed by the
tribunal is also contrary to the opinion expressed by the
NC: 2024:KHC:30714
Doctor. He further contends that the compensation
awarded under different heads is very meager. Therefore,
he seeks to allow the appeal and consequently enhance
the compensation.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent-
Corporation sustains the impugned judgment and award
passed by the tribunal, contending that in the absence of
proof of income, the tribunal has rightly taken the income
of the claimant at Rs.7,000/- per month and the
assessment made by the tribunal on the disability is also
proper, which does not call for interference. She further
contends that the tribunal has awarded just and
reasonable compensation under all heads, in accordance
with the material evidence, both oral and documentary
and the same does not call for interference.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
on perusal of the material on record, the occurrence of
accident, involvement of vehicle, injuries sustained by the
claimant are proved by production of documents as per
NC: 2024:KHC:30714
Exs.P1 to P16. Therefore, the negligence is rightly
attributed as against the driver of the Bus.
7. Now coming to the aspect of age, avocation and
income of the claimant, the tribunal has taken the income
at Rs.7,000/- per month, which is on the lower side. The
Legal Services Authority chart prescribes the notional
income of Rs.11,000/- per month for the accident of the
year 2017. The age of the claimant is 66 years and the
tribunal applied multiplier at '5', which does not call for
interference and the same is retained. The tribunal has
assessed the disability at 10%. However, PW.3-Doctor has
opined the disability of 38% to the right lower limb and
12% to the whole body. The Doctor is an expert in the
field of medicine. Therefore, this Court deems it
appropriate to accept the disability assessed by the Doctor
at 12%. Under the circumstances, the claimant is entitled
for Rs.79,200/- (Rs.11,000/- x 12 x 5 x 12%) towards
loss of income due to disability as against Rs.42,000/-
awarded by the tribunal.
NC: 2024:KHC:30714
8. The tribunal awarded Rs.30,000/- towards pain
and agony. However, this Court deems it appropriate to
award Rs.50,000/- under this head.
9. The tribunal awarded Rs.3,600/- towards food,
attendant, conveyance, nourishment and other incidental
charges etc. However, the claimant was inpatient for 12
days. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to award
Rs.12,000/- under this head.
10. The tribunal awarded Rs.14,000/- towards loss of
income during laid up period. Considering the magnitude
of injuries sustained by the claimant, atleast three months
is required to recuperate and get back to normal day to
day activities. In view of this Court enhancing the income
to Rs.11,000/- per month, Rs.33,000/- (Rs.11,000/- x 3)
is awarded under this head.
11. The tribunal awarded Rs.20,000/- towards loss of
amenities. However, this Court deems it appropriate to
award Rs.30,000/- under this head.
NC: 2024:KHC:30714
12. In view of the above, the claimant would be
entitled to total compensation of Rs.2,04,200/- as
against Rs.1,09,600/- awarded by the tribunal, as
mentioned in the table below:
Sl. Head of compensation Amount of
No. compensation
awarded
1. Pain and agony 50,000-00
2. Food, attendant, conveyance, 12,000-00
nourishment and other
incidental charges etc.
3. Loss of income during laid up 33,000-00
period
4. Loss of income due to 79,200-00
disability
5. Loss of amenities 30,000-00
Total 2,04,200-00
13. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed-in-part;
ii) The impugned judgment and award dated
20.01.2020 passed in MVC.No.217/2018 on
the file of I Additional Small Causes Judge and
MACT, Bengaluru, is modified;
iii) The appellant-claimant is entitled to total
compensation of Rs.2,04,200/- as against
NC: 2024:KHC:30714
Rs.1,09,600/- awarded by the tribunal along
with interest at 9% per annum;
iv) The enhanced compensation amount shall be
deposited with interest at 6% per annum by
the respondent-Corporation within a period of
four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy
of this judgment;
v) The compensation amount shall be released in
favour of the appellant-claimant as per the
terms of the tribunal by electronic transfer to
the claimant upon furnishing the required
bank details/upon proper identification;
vi) All other terms and conditions stipulated by
the tribunal shall stand intact.
Sd/-
(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR)
JUDGE
LB
