Karnataka High Court
Champabai W/O. Bharatkumar Varma vs Sohanlal Premsukh Goud on 16 February, 2024
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3830
MFA No. 101455 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.101455 OF 2014 (MV)
BETWEEN:
CHAMPABAI W/O. BHARATKUMAR VARMA
AGE: 50 YEARS, OCC: ATTENDING
FOR COOK WORK, PRESENTLY NIL,
R/O. NEAR DANDIN HOSPITAL,
BAGALKOT.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. D.V. PATTAR, AND
SRI. ANAND R.KOLLI, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. SOHANLAL PREMSUKH GOUD
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: OWNER OF THE
MOTOR BILE BEARING REG. NO.
KA 29/U-2616
R/O. LALA CATARAGE, NEAR OLD
GOVERNMENT HOSPITAL,
Digitally
BAGALKOT.
signed by
SAMREEN
SAMREEN AYUB
DESHNUR
AYUB
DESHNUR Date:
2024.02.23
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
14:30:59
+0530
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
RAMADEV GALLI, BELAGAVI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SURESH S.GUNDI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1 SERVED)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED U/SEC.173(1) OF MV ACT 1988,
AGAINST JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD:25.02.2014, PASSED IN
MVC.NO.50/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER MACT NO.III
BAGALKOT, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3830
MFA No. 101455 of 2014
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Though the matter is listed for admission, it is taken
up for final disposal.
2. Heard Sri.D.V.Pattar, learned counsel for the
appellant and Sr.Suresh S. Gundi, learned counsel,
learned counsel for respondent No.2.
3. Claimant is in appeal challenging the validity of
the judgment and award passed in MVC No.50/2012 dated
25.02.2014 on the file of Additional MACT No.III, Bagalkot
on the ground of inadequacy of compensation.
4. Briefs facts of the case are as under:
A claim petition came to be filed under Section 166
of the Motor Vehicles Act contending that on 20.09.2011
at about 4.30 p.m., when the claimant was the pillion rider
of TVS XL motorcycle bearing No.KA29/U-2616, met with
an road traffic accident, on account of rash and negligent
driving of the driver of the motorcycle at Sikkeri cross and
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3830
sustained injuries. She was taken to the hospital, treated
there and got cured of all injuries.
5. The Insurance Company contested the claim, by
filing detailed written statement.
6. Tribunal, on contest, allowed the claim petition
in a sum of Rs.60,000/- as quantum of compensation with
interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realisation.
7. Being not satisfied with the quantum of
compensation, claimant is in appeal.
8. Sri.D.V.Pattar, learned counsel for the
appellant, reiterating the grounds urged in the appeal
memorandum sought for enhanced compensation on the
ground that the Tribunal has not properly considered the
pain and suffering and the oral evidence of Dr.Krantikiran,
who is a neurosurgeon in Hubli, has awarded meager
compensation and sought for enhanced compensation.
9. Per contra, Sri.Suresh S. Gundi, learned counsel
supported the impugned judgment.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3830
10. In view of the rival contentions of the parties,
this Court perused the material on record, meticulously.
11. On such perusal of the material on record, it is
duly establishing that the claimant has sustained
accidental injuries whereby, frontal bone in the mid line
got fractured and there was a contusion and haematoma.
He was in-patient for a period of 09 days.
12. Taking note of the impact of the injury and the
number of days he has spent in the hospital, as in-patient
and there was a fracture in the mid line of the frontal
bone, at least for a period of two months, he would not be
in a position to attend to his normal duty.
13. Therefore, on the head of pain and suffering
and on the head of loss of income during laid up period, is
to be enhanced.
14. Instead of enhancing the compensation on each
and every head, if a sum of Rs.40,000/- is enhanced
globally, over and above Rs.60,000/-, ends of justice
would be met.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:3830
15. Accordingly, following:
ORDER
i. Appeal is allowed as against sum of
Rs.60,000/0 claimant would be entitled to
Rs.1,00,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from
the date of petition till its realisation.
ii. Insurance company is granted four weeks
time to pay the balance amount.
Sd/-
JUDGE
KAV
