Karnataka High Court
Vithabai W/O Hirageppa Harawalakar vs Smt. Shubhangi And Ors on 1 February, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1242
MFA No. 200122 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200122 OF 2019 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
VITHABAI W/O HIRAGEPPA HARAWALAKAR
AGE: 65 YRS OCC: TAILORING WORK
R/O: 43/68, KRISTANA NAGAR, VIJAYAPURA ROAD,
SOLAPUR, NOW AT IBRHAIMPURPETH,
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. KOUJALAGI CHANDRAKANT LAXMAN, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SMT. SHUBHANGI
W/O SHIDDHESHWAR HARAWALAKAR,
Digitally signed
AGE: 37 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK,
by KHAJAAMEEN C/O: SACHIN S/O ANANDRAO LOKARE,
L MALAGHAN PLOT NO.5, MANISH NAGAR, RING ROAD, B.WARD,
Location: High
Court of KOLAHAPUR.416001. (MAHARASHTRA STATE)
Karnataka
2. THE MANAGER LEGAL
THE RELIANCE GENERAL INSRUANCE CO. LTD,
CTS NO. 472-473, VA KALABURAGI SQUARE,
DESAI CROSS, DESHAPANDE NAGAR,
HUBLI-580020.
3. VIJAY S/O SUNIL GADALE,
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS
R/O: 6/616 CHANDRURE BOL, MAGALWAR PETH,
ICHALAKARANJI, TQ:HATKANGALE,
DIST: KOLAHAPUR-416115.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1242
MFA No. 200122 of 2019
4. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD,
SANGAM BUILDING S.S. FRONT ROAD,
VIJAYAPUR-586101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. PREETI PATIL MELKUNDI, ADV. FOR R2; V/O DATED:
05.03.2019 NOTICE TO R1, R3 AND R4 ARE DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT,
PRAYING PLEASED TO a) CALL FOR THE RECORDS. b) TO
MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED-10.09.2018
PASSED IN MVC NO.1958/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE COURT
OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
AND MEMBER MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.IV
VIJAYAPURA AT VIJAYAPURA. AND ALLOW THIS APPEAL TO
GRANT THE COMPENSATION AMOUNT BY RS.10,68,500/- ONLY
AS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THIS HON BLE
COURT, c) ORDER FOR COSTS OF THIS APPEAL AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved by the award passed in MVC
No.1958/2013, dated 10.09.2018, by the III Additional
District And Sessions Judge and Member MACT-IV,
Vijayapura, the claimant is before this court seeking
enhancement of the compensation.
2. It is the case of the claimant that the claimant
had sustained fracture of distal radius and ulna 'displaced'
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1242
right forearm. As per Exhibit-P29, MLC letter the claimant
was advised to take rest for 1½ month and she was
inpatient for four days. It is the case of the claimant that
she had spent an amount of Rs.22,439/- towards medical
expenses. According to the doctor, the claimant had
sustained 30-35% disability to the right upper limb. The
court below had not considered the said disability and
granted compensation as per the table below:
Heads Compensation
Awarded
1. Transportation : Rs. 5,000/-
2. Food, Attendant And Nourishment : Rs. 4,000/-
3. Medical Expenses : Rs. 22,500/-
4. Pain and Sufferings : Rs. 50,000/-
TOTAL : Rs. 81,500/-
3. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant
submits that the court below ought to have considered the
disability of 30-35% to the right upper limb. It is further
submitted that even under all other heads also the
amounts that were granted by the court below were not
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1242
reasonable. It is submitted that no amounts are granted
towards loss of amenities and towards loss of income
during laid up period.
4. Learned counsel for the insurance company
submits that the court below had rightly granted the
compensation and no grounds are made out for
enhancement of the compensation.
5. Having heard the learned counsel on either
side, perused the material on record. In this case the
claimant had sustained fracture of distal radius and ulna
'displaced' right forearm, the court below had rightly
granted an amount of Rs.50,000/- under the head of
pain and sufferings, towards transportation, food
attendant and nourishment an amount of Rs.9,000/-
was granted which is also reasonable amount. Towards
medical expenses also an amount of Rs.22,500/-
granted which is also based on the evidence produced and
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1242
no interference is called for. As rightly argued by the
learned counsel for the claimant the court below had not
granted any amount under the head of loss of amenities.
In this case there is no evidence with regard to the income
of the claimant. Considering the fact that this is an
accident of the year 2012, this Court considering the chart
prepared by the Karnataka State Legal Services
Authorities is taking the income of Rs.6,500/- p.m., and
for two months laid up period, he would be entitled for an
amount of Rs.13,000/-, towards loss of income during
laid up period. Considering the fact that the court below
had not granted any amount towards loss of amenities
this Court considering the injuries and disability sustained
by the appellant awarding is an amount of Rs.20,000/-
under the said head. The court below had rightly not
considered the disability as stated by the Doctor as there
is no basis for him to come to that conclusion.
6. Further in the light of the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.MEKALA vs. M.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1242
MALATHI AND ANOTHER1, the claimant is entitled for an
amount of Rs.10,000/- towards Legal Expenses.
7. The claimant is therefore, entitled to the
compensation under the following heads:
Heads Compensation
Awarded
1. Pain and Sufferings : Rs. 50,000/-
2. Transportation, Food, Nourishment : Rs. 9,000/-
and Attendant
3. Medical Expenses : Rs. 22,500/-
4. Loss of income during laid up : Rs. 13,000/-
period
5. Loss of Amenities : Rs. 20,000/-
6. Legal Expenses : Rs. 10,000/-
TOTAL : Rs. 1,24,500/-
8. Accordingly, the Appeal is Partly Allowed,
enhancing the compensation amount from an amount of
Rs.81,000/- to an amount of Rs.1,24,500/-.
i) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6%
p.a. from the date of petition till the date of
realization.
(2014) 11 SCC 178
NC: 2024:KHC-K:1242
ii) The respondent - insurance company shall
deposit the amount within a period of eight
weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the
judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is
entitled to withdraw the entire amount without
furnishing any security.
iii) Registry is directed to return the Trial Court
Records to the Tribunal, along with certified
copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith
without any delay.
iv) No costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand
closed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
JJ
