Karnataka High Court
Mr P G Chengappa vs Mr Abdul Rasheed Sab on 2 August, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:30699
MFA No. 9042 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
MFA NO. 9042 OF 2013 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
MR P G CHENGAPPA
S/O P P GANAPATHI
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
R/AT NO.48, 2ND CROSS
MANJUNATHA NILAYA
BALAJI LAYOUT, BABUSAPALYA
BANGALORE 560 043 ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. M R KUMARASWAMY, ADV.)
AND:
1. MR ABDUL RASHEED SAB
S/O LATE HUSSAIN SARIF
M/S MUBARAK TRANSPORT
NEAR PRIVATE BUS STAND
H H ROAD, CHITRADURGA DIST
Digitally signed by CHITRADURGA 577 501
PRAJWAL A
Location: HIGH COURT 2. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO LTD
OF KARNATAKA REGIONAL OFFICE, SHANKARNARAYANA
BUILDING, M G ROAD, BANGALORE 560 001
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.A.N.KRISHNA SWAMY, ADV. FOR R2;
VIDE ORDER DATED 08.09.2015
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.06.2008
PASSED IN MVC NO.7260/2007 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII
ADDITIONAL JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL
CAUSES, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:30699
MFA No. 9042 of 2013
FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
ORAL JUDGMENT
In this appeal, the petitioner is challenging the
judgment and award dated 09.06.2008 passed in
M.V.C.No.7260/2007 by the Member, MACT-V, Court of
Small Causes, Bangalore City, (for short, 'Tribunal').
2. For the sake of convenience, the rank of the
parties will be referred to as per the status before the
Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the case are, on 25.10.2006 at
10.00 a.m., while the petitioner was traveling in a
tempo traveler bearing Reg.No.KA-01/B-4998 near
Yallapura Gate, Gubbi taluk, Tumkur district, on NH-
206 road, a Lorry bearing Reg.No.KA-16/A-0238
dashed against the tempo traveler. Due to which, the
petitioner sustained injuries. He was treated at Abhaya
Hospital and Wockhardt Hospital, Bangalore. Seeking
NC: 2024:KHC:30699
grant of compensation of Rs.5,00,000/-, the petitioner
has approached the Tribunal. The claim was opposed
by the insurer of the Lorry. The Tribunal after taking
evidence and hearing both the parties, allowed the
claim petition granting compensation of Rs.1,58,000/-
with 6% interest. Pleading inadequacy and seeking
enhancement of compensation, the petitioner has filed
this appeal on various grounds.
4. Heard Sri M.R.Kumaraswamy, learned
counsel for petitioner and Sri A.N.Krishna Swamy,
learned counsel for insurance company.
5. Learned counsel for petitioner has
contended that the petitioner was working in private
company. He has suffered fracture of femur and
incisors, he was laid up for more than 3 months. He
has examined Dr.S.Ramachandra as PW.2, who has
assessed the disability. The Tribunal has awarded
compensation only towards pain and suffering, future
medical expenses and loss of amenities in life and
NC: 2024:KHC:30699
discomforts. No compensation is awarded towards loss
of income during laid up period, loss of future income,
and incidental expenses such as attendant charges,
traveling and food and nourishment and even
compensation awarded towards medical expenses is on
lower side and sought for enhancement.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for insurance
company has contended that the petitioner was
working in a private company and on his post
treatment, he resumed the duty and he is drawing the
same salary as before the accident and therefore,
there is no loss of earning. Further, it is contended that
the petitioner got reimbursement of the medical
expenses from the company and as such, he is not
entitled for repeated award of medical bills. The
incidental expenses is considered by the Tribunal and
one month's salary was not paid i.e. for the month of
December and that could be the loss of income during
NC: 2024:KHC:30699
laid up period, to which the petitioner is entitled to
utmost and he has supported the impugned judgment.
7. I gave anxious consideration to the
arguments addressed by the learned counsel for
parties and perused the records.
8. The accident in question is not in dispute.
The dispute is only regarding quantum of
compensation. The Tribunal has assessed the
compensation as follows:
1. Towards pain and suffering Rs.45,000/-
2. Towards medical expenses Rs.53,000/-
3. Towards future medical Rs.10,000/-
expenses
4. Towards loss of amenities and Rs.50,000/-
discomfort
Total Rs.1,58,000/-
9. Medical evidence shows that the petitioner
has suffered comminuted fracture of right femur,
broken central incisors and he was under
hospitalization for 8 days. The petitioner has examined
the treated doctor as PW.2, who assessed the
disability. Taking into consideration the medical
NC: 2024:KHC:30699
evidence, even if it is accepted that the petitioner has
suffered the physical disability on account of he
continuing in his job, it is difficult to accept the
argument that the petitioner has suffered loss of
income due to disability.
10. As regarding medical expenses is
concerned, the bills which are made available at Ex.P8,
point out a sum of Rs.1,46,040/- was paid by the
petitioner to three hospitals. An amount of Rs.88,616/-
was reimbursed by the Company to the Wockhardt
Hospital, Bengaluru and thereby the balance of medical
bills comes to Rs.57,879/-, for which the petitioner is
entitled to be reimbursed. The petitioner was under
hospitalization for 8 days. He has spent money towards
attendant, traveling expenses and food and
nourishment, hence, a sum of Rs.8,000/- is
consolidatedly awarded towards the incidental
expenses. The petitioner was an employee of Thomas
Assessments (P) Limited. Ex.P9 is the leave certificate
NC: 2024:KHC:30699
issued by the company indicating that the petitioner
has applied 02 months 21 days of leave, for which, he
suffered the loss of leave, which has to be
compensated. Ex.P10-the salary certificate points out
that the petitioner was drawing net salary of
Rs.29,496/-, at that rate, the petitioner has to be
compensated for loss of leave. The petitioner is entitled
to compensation as follows:
1. Towards pain and suffering Rs.45,000/-
2. Towards medical expenses Rs.57,879/-
3. Incidental expenses Rs.8,000/-
4. Loss of leave Rs.79,639/-
5. Towards future medical Rs.10,000/-
expenses
4. Towards loss of amenities and Rs.60,000/-
discomfort
Total Rs.2,60,518/-
Tribunal Award Rs.1,58,000/-
Enhanced Amount Rs.1,02,518/-
11. It is just compensation in the facts and
circumstances of the case. Since the Insurance
Company has already satisfied the award, it is required
to satisfy the enhanced compensation also. Hence, the
appeal merits consideration. In the result, the
following:
NC: 2024:KHC:30699
ORDER
The appeal is hereby allowed in part.
The impugned judgment and award is modified.
The appellant would be entitled for enhanced
compensation of Rs.1,02,518/- along with interest at
the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till
its deposit excluding interest on future medical
expenses.
The Insurance Company shall deposit the
enhanced compensation with interest within eight
weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this
judgment.
Insofar as apportionment is concerned, the order
of the Tribunal stands unaltered.
SD/-
(T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA)
JUDGE
MKM/NR
