Karnataka High Court
The Oriental Insurance vs Siddu And Ors on 7 August, 2024
Author: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N.S.Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5786
MFA No. 201804 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO.201804 OF 2017 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE
COMPANY LIMITED,
THROUGH ITS SENIOR DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE AT N.G.COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR,
OPP: MINI VIDHAN SOUDHA, MAIN ROAD,
KALABURAGI-585102.
REP. BY AUTHORISED SIGNATORY.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI H.A. QUAYUM, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by SUMITRA
SHERIGAR 1. SIDDU S/O SITANNA DHORI
Location: HIGH AGE 27 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE NOW NIL
COURT OF
KARNATAKA R/O. JALHALLI, TQ. DEODURG,
DIST. RAICHUR-584111.
2. BASWARAJ S/O VIRUPAKSHAPPA SHEELVANTH
AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS RIDER OF
MOTORBIKE BEARING REG. KA 33/H 5536,
R/O. JALHALLI, TQ. DEODURG,
DIST. RAICHUR-584111.
3. TEJRAJ NAYAK
S/O BASSANNA NAYAK METIGOUDA,
AGE: 33 YEARS,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5786
MFA No. 201804 of 2017
OCC: OWNER OF MOTORBIKE BEARING
REG. KA 36/U 2361,
R/O. GEJJIBHAVI, TQ.DEODURG,
DIST: RAICHUR-584111.
4. MOHD. KHAJA HUSSAIN
S/O SOFISAB
AGE: 62 YEARS,
OCC: OWNERR OF MOTORBIKE BEARING
REG. KA 33/H 5536, R/O JALHALLI,
TQ. DEODURG, DIST. RAICHUR-584111.
5. THE MANAGER,
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
P.B.NO.53, SUKJHARI COMPLEX, 1ST FLOOR,
GANDHI CHOWK, RAICHUR-584111.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI CHAITANYAKUMAR C. M. FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 TO R4 IS DISPENSED WITH
SRI MANVENDRA REDDY, ADV. FOR R5)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING
THAT THIS HON BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED-25.10.2017 PASSED IN
MVC NO.15/2015 BY THE SENIOR CIVIL AND JMFC,
SHORAPUR.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5786
MFA No. 201804 of 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.S.SANJAY GOWDA)
1. This is an appeal by the Insurance Company
challenging the quantum of compensation awarded for the
injuries suffered by the claimant.
2. In respect of an accident which is not in dispute and
the liability of the insurer to pay the compensation also not
in dispute. The Tribunal has awarded the following sums:
Compensation
Sl. As awarded by
No. Nature of Heads the Tribunal
(In Rs.)
1. Loss of future income 4,53,600/-
2. Loss of amenities 50,000/-
3. Pain and suffering 45,000/-
4. Food and nourishment 5,000/-
5. Conveyance charges 5,000/-
6. Medical expenses 9,715/-
Total 5,68,315/-
Rounded off to 5,68,000/-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5786
3. In arriving at the said amount, the Tribunal has
assessed the permanent disability at 35% and has taken
the notional income at Rs.6000/- per month.
4. The learned counsel for the insurer contends that the
doctor who was examined was not the treated doctor and
therefore the acceptance of the disability as assessed by
him cannot be termed as correct.
5. The doctor who was examined was not the doctor
who treated the claimant. The medical record which is
produced during the course of stay of the petitioner at
Navodaya Medical College Hospital and Research Centre
Raichur, indicates that the claimant had a fracture of the
middle one third of the left clavicle, communited fracture
of the 4th and 5th right metacarpal and fracture of the
proximal phalanx of the 5th toe with foreign bodies. He had
also suffered a fracture of the left iliac bone and he was
hospitalized from 24.12.2009 till 23.01.2010.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5786
6. In my view, having regard to the fact that the
claimant had suffered four fractures and was hospitalized
for nearly a month, it would be appropriate to assess the
permanent disability at 20%.
7. The Tribunal has taken the income at Rs.6,000/- per
month, which is just and proper and would have to be
accepted. Consequently, the claimant would be entitled to
a sum of Rs.2,59,200/- towards loss of future income.
8. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.50,000/-
towards loss of amenities and Rs.45,000/- towards pain
and suffering. These amounts are just and proper and
therefore they are affirmed.
9. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/-
towards food nourishment and conveyance charges.
Having regard to the fact that the claimant was
hospitalized for nearly a month, it would be appropriate to
award a sum Rs.30,000/- towards food nourishment and
conveyance charges.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5786
10. The Tribunal has not awarded any sums towards loss
of income during laid up period. In my view, it would be
appropriate to treat the laid-up period as three months
and accordingly award a sum of Rs.18,000/- for the said
period.
11. The sum of Rs.9,715/- towards medical expenses is
affirmed.
12. Therefore, in modification of the award of the
Tribunal, the claimant would be entitled for the following
sums:
Compensation
Sl. awarded by this
No. Nature of Heads Court
(In Rs.)
1. Loss of future income 2,59,200/-
2. Loss of amenities 50,000/-
3. Pain and suffering 45,000/-
Food, nourishment and
4. 30,000/-
conveyance charges
5. Medical expenses 9,715/-
6. Income during laid-up period 18,000/-
Total 4,11,915/-
Rounded off 4,12,000/-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:5786
13. Thus, the claimant would be entitled for
compensation of Rs.4,12,000/- as against Rs.5,68,000/-
awarded by the Tribunal, along with interest at the rate of
6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.
14. The Insurance Companies are directed to deposit the
amount of compensation awarded within a period of two
months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this
judgment.
15. The apportionment, deposit and release of the
enhanced compensation amount shall be made as per the
ratio adopted by the Tribunal.
16. The amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to
the tribunal for disbursal in terms of the award forthwith.
The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
(N.S.SANJAY GOWDA)
JUDGE
MSR
