Karnataka High Court
Prema T vs Loheth Kumar M on 7 August, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:31520
MFA No. 5567 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.5567 OF 2015 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
1. PREMA. T,
W/O SRINIVAS,
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
R/O MADERAHALLI VILLAGE,
KOLAR TALUK.
APPELLANT
(BY MS. SWATHI G. HEGDE ADVOCATE FOR SRI. PAVANA
CHANDRA SHETTY H.)
AND:
1. LOHETH KUMAR. M,
S/O MAHENDRA,
AGE MAJOR,
Digitally signed by R/AT NO.829, 2ND STAGE,
PRAJWAL A YELAHANKA NEW TOWN,
Location: HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA BENGALURU.
2. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
BINDU, DODDAPET,
KOLAR,
REP BY ITS MANAGER.
RESPONDENTS
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:31520
MFA No. 5567 of 2015
(BY SRI. L SREEKANTA RAO ADVOCATE FOR R2;
V/O DTD 07.08.2015 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENCED
WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.04.2015 PASSED
IN MVC NO.387/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM., AND MACT, KOLAR,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION AND ETC,.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE
GOWDA
ORAL JUDGMENT
The appeal is at the stage of admission, by consent
of both side taken up for final disposal.
2. In this appeal, the petitioner has challenged the
judgment and award dated 22.04.2015 in
MVC.No.387/2013 passed by the Prl. Senior Civil Judge
and MACT, Kolar ('the Tribunal' for short).
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein
are referred as per their ranking before the Tribunal.
NC: 2024:KHC:31520
4. The brief facts of the case are, on 08.09.2013
at 6:30 pm near Maderahalli gate of Kolar Taluk, while the
petitioner was walking by the side of the road Yamaha SZ
bearing registration No. KA-04/HM-8857 dashed against
the petitioner, due to which she sustained the injuries. She
was treated at SNR Hospital Kolar, RL. Jalappa Hospital
Kolar and Narendra Hospital, Kolar under hospitalization.
Seeking grant of `10,00,000/- compensation she
approached the Tribunal. The claim was opposed by the
insurance company. The Tribunal after taking the evidence
and hearing both the parties awarded compensation of
Rs.2,06,232/- and directing the insurance company to pay
the compensation. Pleading inadequacy and seeing
enhancement the petitioner is before this Court.
5. Heard the arguments of Ms. Swathi G. Hegde,
learned counsel for the appellant and Sri. L. Srinkanta
Rao, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 - insurance
company.
NC: 2024:KHC:31520
6. It is contended by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that petitioner being aged of 28 years, suffered
type one compound fracture of both the bone of right limb,
she was under hospitalization for 8 days, due to injuries
she had suffered shortening of leg to an extent of ½ inch.
The disability certificate is produced as per Ex.P.13 and
PW.2 Doctor has been examined to explain that she has
suffered whole body disability of 19.6%, where the
Tribunal has taken it at 10% only. In the year 2013 the
petitioner was earning more than `10,000/- p.m., but the
Tribunal has taken only Rs.5,000/- p.m,. The
compensation awarded towards pain and sufferings and
loss of amenities is inadequate, no compensation is
awarded towards loss of income during laid up and sought
for enhancement.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the insurance
company has contended that the petitioner though
suffered fracture that the Doctor has give opinion about
limb disability is 46.8% and 19.6% of the whole body is
NC: 2024:KHC:31520
incorrect and for this reasons the Tribunal has taken whole
body disability as 10% and has proportionately awarded
the compensation. He is fare in his submission that a
nominal compensation may be award towards loss of
income during laid up period. He has not disputed the
liability on the part of the insurance company and
supported the case.
8. I have given my anxious consideration to the
arguments addressed on behalf of the parties and perused
the records.
9. The accident is not in dispute so also the
injuries sustained by the petitioner. The medical evidence
shows that the petitioner has suffered limb disability of
46.8%. She being coolie, aged 28 years, the nature of
work and the circumstances explains that the injury is a
type one compound fracture which effects earning capacity
of the petitioner. 1/3rd of the limb disability as to be
considered. Therefore, the disability is taken at 15% for
the calculation of further loss of income. Medical bills is
NC: 2024:KHC:31520
reimbursed by the Tribunal also the compensation under
the incidental charges. In so far as pain and sufferings,
loss of amenities and discomfort a small enhancement is
required.
10. The accident is of the year 2013, a person with
no proof of income will not earn less than `8,000/- p.m,
therefore, the notional income of the petitioner is to be
considered at `8,000/- p.m., and disability at 15% and for
her age was 28 applicable multiplier is 17. Loss of further
income will be assessed (8000 X 12 X 17 X
15%)=Rs.2,44,800/-. In the case of this nature,
compensation granted to the petitioner shall be just and it
shall not be a peanut or bonanza. Hence towards pain and
sufferings `40,000/-, towards medical expenses `44,232/-,
attendant charges, food and nourishment and conveyance
together at `10,000/-, loss of amenities and discomfort
`30,000/-, future loss of income `2,44,800/- is assessed,
the petitioner has laid up minimum for 4 months hence,
loss of income during laid up `32,000/-.
NC: 2024:KHC:31520
11. Petitioner is entitled to compensation as
hereunder:
Sl.No. Heads Amount awarded Amount awarded
by the Tribunal by this Court (`)
(`)
1. Pain and suffering 25000.00 40000.00
2. Future loss of earnings 102000.00 244800.00
3. Attendant charges, 10000.00 10000.00
food, nourishment and
conveyance charges
4. Medical expenses 44232.00 44232.00
6 Loss of amenities and 25000.00 30000.00
discomforts
7 Loss of income during 00.00 32000.00
laid up period
Total 206232.00 401032.00
Enhanced Compensation 1,94,800.00
It is the just compensation that the petitioner is
entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case.
12. In view of the above discussion appeal merits
consideration in the result, the following:
NC: 2024:KHC:31520
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed in part;
ii) The impugned judgment and awarded is
modified;
iii) Petitioner would be entitled for enhanced
compensation of `1,94,800/- together with interest
at 6% p.a, from the dated of petition till the date of
deposit;
iv) Both the respondents are liable to pay the
compensation;
v) Insurance company is directed to deposit the
compensation with interest within 8 weeks from
receipt of certified copy of this judgment.
SD/-
(T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA)
JUDGE
PNV
