Karnataka High Court
Tippeswamy vs The Managing Director on 7 February, 2024
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2725
MFA No. 100934 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100934 OF 2016 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
TIPPESWAMY
S/O. VEERABHADRAPPA SHIVAKAVI,
AGE: 34 YEARS, OCC: HAMAL,
R/O: UJJAYANI, TQ: HARAPANAHALLI,
DIST: DAVANAGERE,
NOW RESIDING AT:
MRUTHUNJAYA NAGAR, 6TH CROSS,
RANEBENNUR, TQ: RANEBENNUR, DIST: HAVERI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. PRUTHVI K.S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally
signed by
SAMREEN
AYUB
SAMREEN
AYUB
DESHNUR
1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
DESHNUR Date:
2024.02.15
13:26:21
VIJAYANAND ROAD LINES
+0530
HEAD OFFICE, ENKAY COMPLEX,
HUBBALLI, TQ: HUBBALLI,
DIST: DAHRWAD.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER,
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
RENUKA ARCADA, SATATION ROAD,
GADAG, TQ AND DIST: GADAG.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. HANAMANTHAREDDY SAHUKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. C.V. ANGADI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2725
MFA No. 100934 of 2016
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 ,
PRAYING TO MODIFY THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 25-04-2014 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE PRINCIPAL
SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, RANEBENNUR, IN
M.V.C.NO.102/2009, BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION
AWARDED, BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL, IN THE INTEREST OF
JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Claimant is in appeal, challenging the validity of the
judgment and award passed in MVC.No.102/2009 dated
25.04.2014 on the file of Prl. Senior Civil Judge and MVCT,
Ranebennur.
2. Admitted facts are that claimant got injured in a
road traffic accident occurred on 01.01.1999 at about
1.00 a.m. on P.B.Road near Engineering College,
Ranebennur, involving a truck bearing No.KA 25/7851 and
another truck bearing No.TN28/B-7949. As such he laid
claim under Section 166 of Motor Vehicle Act. Same was
resisted by filing necessary written statement.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2725
3. The Tribunal on contest, allowed the claim petition
for a sum of Rs.92,900/- and saddled the liability on the
owner of lorry bearing No.KA 25/7851.
4. Being aggrieved by inadequacy of quantum of
compensation, claimant is in the appeal.
5. Sri.K.S.Pruthvi, learned counsel for the appellant
re-iterating the grounds urged in the appeal memorandum
contended that Tribunal has taken only 5% disability factor
and where as the doctor has assessed at 75%.
6. He has also contended on the ground of loss of
amenities, improper compensation is awarded and
therefore, sought for suitable enhancement.
7. Per contra, Sri.Hanumanthareddy Sahukar,
learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Sri.C.V.Angadi,
learned counsel for respondent No.2, supported the
impugned judgment.
8. Perused the material on record, meticulously, in
view of the rival contentions of the parties.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2725
9. On such perusal of material on record, it is not in
dispute that the injured has been treated and he has been
cured of all his injuries. Doctor has assessed the disability
factor after ten years of the accident and issued disability
certificate vide Ex.P.11 assessing 75% disability in normal
circumstances.
10. Since, P.W.2 is not a treated doctor and the
Court should be taking 1/3rd of the disability factor. Since,
the disability certificate is issued 10 years later, there is
sufficient force in the argument put forth on behalf of
respondent No.1 that disability cannot be assessed at 1/3rd
of the disability factor shown in the certificate (Ex.P.11).
11. Taking note of the fact that some amount of
disability has been sustained by the injured, having regard
to the accidental injuries and also on the ground of loss of
amenities, only Rs.10,000/- is awarded and there is no
amount awarded for the nourishment, attendant charges
etc. This Court is of the considered opinion that awarding
NC: 2024:KHC-D:2725
Rs.50,000/- as additional compensation globally, would
meet the ends of justice.
12. Accordingly, the following:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed as against the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal in a
sum of Rs.92,900/-, the claimant would be
entitled to sum of Rs.1,42,900/- with interest
at 7% p.a. from the date of institution till its
realisation. Less the delayed period of 593
days in filing the appeal.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KAV
