Karnataka High Court
Sri Chandrashekar vs Icici Lombard General Insurance ... on 29 February, 2024
Author: Pradeep Singh Yerur
Bench: Pradeep Singh Yerur
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:8438
MFA No. 7019 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7019 OF 2021 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI CHANDRASHEKAR
S/O LATE KRISHNAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 34 YEARS,
R/AT 121,
UDIPALYA VILLAGE,
NEAR ART OF LIVING,
UTTARAHALLI HOBLI,
KANAKAPURA MAIN ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 082.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GIRIMALLAIAH., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
Digitally signed NO.121, THE ESTATE, 9TH FLOOR,
by V KRISHNA
DICKENSON ROAD,
Location: High
Court of M G ROAD,
Karnataka BENGALURU - 560 042.
BY ITS MANAGER
2. MR RAJ KUMAR PINGALE
MAJOR
(AGE, FATHER NAME NOT
KNOWN TO APPELLANT)
NO.9/11, 27TH CROSS,
VENUGOPALASWAMY LAYOUT,
EJIPURA, VIVEKANAGAR POST,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:8438
MFA No. 7019 of 2021
BENGALURU - 560 047
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRADEEP B.,ADVOCATE FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED
28.10.2022;)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.09.2021 PASSED IN MVC
NO.4078/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL SMALL
CAUSES JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-7,
BENGALURU SCCH-7, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION
FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is preferred by the claimant challenging the
judgment and award dated 20.09.2021 passed by the IX ASCJ,
Small Causes and Additional MACT, Bengaluru,(SCCH-7) (for
short 'the Tribunal') in MVC.No.4078/2019. This appeal is
founded on the premise of inadequate and meager
compensation awarded by the tribunal.
2. Parties to the appeal shall be referred to as per their
status before the tribunal.
NC: 2024:KHC:8438
3. Brief facts of the case is as under:
That on 10.06.2019 at about 5.50 p.m, the claimant was
driving Auto Rickshaw bearing reg.No.KA-02-AF-1167, when he
reached near Anjaneya Temple, Salahunase Village, Uttarahalli
Hobli, the Lorry bearing reg.No.KA-01-AF-1085 came in a rash
and negligent manner and dashed against the Auto Rickshaw,
causing severe injuries to the driver of the Auto Rickshaw.
Hence, the claimant preferred a claim petition seeking
compensation.
3.1. On service of notice, respondent No.2 was placed
ex parte. Respondent No.1 has filed statement of objection,
denying the claim of the claimant and sought for dismissal of
the petition.
3.2. On the basis of pleadings, the tribunal framed
relevant issues for consideration.
3.3. In order to substantiate the issue and to establish
the case, the claimant got examined himself as PW.1 and the
Doctor as PW.2 and got marked documents as Exs.P1 to P14.
On the other hand, respondent got examined RW.1 and got
marked document as Ex.R1.
NC: 2024:KHC:8438
3.4. On the basis of material evidence, both oral and
documentary and on hearing the submissions of learned
counsel for both parties, the tribunal awarded compensation of
Rs.3,30,000/- with interest @ 6% and directed the respondent
No.1 - Insurance Company to pay the compensation.
3.5. Being aggrieved by the meager compensation
amount awarded by the tribunal, the claimant is before this
Court seeking enhancement of compensation.
4. The main contention of the learned counsel for
appellant-claimant is that, the tribunal has committed an error
in awarding meagre compensation, which calls for interference
at the hands of this Court. Accordingly, he seeks enhancement
of compensation.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for respondent-Insurance
Company submits that the tribunal has rightly awarded just and
reasonable compensation, which does not call for interference.
Therefore, on these grounds, he seeks to dismiss the appeal.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant-
claimant and learned counsel for respondent-Insurance
NC: 2024:KHC:8438
Company and perused the impugned judgment and award, the
claimant has produced the documents as Exs.P1 to P14, out of
which, Exs.P1 to P7 are the police records, which depicts the
filing of FIR and laying the charge sheet against the driver of
the offending vehicle Lorry. Hence, negligence is rightly
attributed as against the driver of the offending vehicle.
7. Now coming to the aspect of age, avocation, income
and disability are required to be considered. it is stated that
age of the claimant was 36 years as on the date of occurrence
of accident and applied the multiplier '15', which does not call
for interference. The income taken by the tribunal is
Rs.10,000/- per month as notional income. However, the
notional income chart of the Legal Services Authority prescribes
the income of Rs.14,000/- per month for the accident year
2019. Accordingly, income is taken as Rs.14,000/- per month.
8. PW.2-Doctor has opined the disability to the extent
of 46% to the left lower limb and 22.5% to the whole body.
However, the tribunal not accepting the version of the Doctor
has assessed the disability of 15% to the whole body. Having
perused the opinion expressed by the PW.2 - Doctor, that the
NC: 2024:KHC:8438
disability of 46% to the left lower limb and 27% to the left
upper limb and considering the fact that the claimant is Auto
Rickshaw driver by profession, the disability would certainly
affect his future earning capacity of driving the Auto Rickshaw.
The whole body disability has been opined by the Doctor at
22.5%. Considering the same I am of the opinion that 20%
functional disability would be taken up to the whole body.
Being consonance with the judgment of Apex Court in the case
of Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar, (2011) 1 SCC 343.
Therefore, the loss of future earning capacity due to disability
would be Rs.5,04,000/- (Rs.14,000/- x 12 x 15 x 20%) as
against Rs.2,70,000/- awarded by the tribunal.
9. Towards pain and suffering, the tribunal awarded
Rs.20,000/-. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to
award additional amount of Rs.50,000/-. In all, the claimant
would be entitled to Rs.70,000/- considering the magnitude of
injuries of 3 fractures.
10. Towards loss of income during laid up period, the
tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/-. In view of enhancement of
the income by this Court to Rs.14,000/- per month, the
NC: 2024:KHC:8438
claimant would require atleast four months period to recuperate
and to get back to his normal day to day activities. Therefore,
the claimant would be entitled to Rs.56,000/-(Rs.14,000/- x
4) under the head loss of income during laid-up period.
11. Towards food, conveyance, nourishment, the
Tribunal has not awarded any compensation. The claimant was
in-patient for a period of 34 days. Hence, I deem it
appropriate to award Rs.34,000/- under this head.
12. The tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- towards loss
of amenities. I deem it appropriate to award an additional
amount of Rs.30,000/-. In all, the claimant would be entitled to
Rs.50,000/- under this head.
13. Towards future medical expenses, PW.2-Doctor has
adduced in his evidence that Rs.30,000/- would be required for
future medical expenses. I deem it appropriate to award
amount of Rs.20,000/- under this head.
14. Towards medical expenses, the Tribunal has not
awarded any compensation. On the basis of the actual bills
NC: 2024:KHC:8438
produced by the claimant, I deem it appropriate to award Rs.
Rs.26,172/- under this head.
15. In view of the above the claimant would be entitled
to a total compensation of Rs.7,60,172/- along with interest
at 6% as against Rs.3,30,000/- as mentioned in the table
below:
Heads Amount in Rs.
Loss of future earnings 5,04,000-00
Pain and suffering 70,000-00
Loss of amenities 50,000-00
Loss of income during laid-up 56,000-00
period
Food, conveyance and attendant 34,000-00
charges
Medical expenses 26,172-00
Future Medical expenses 20,000-00
TOTAL 7,60,172-00
16. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed-in-part;
NC: 2024:KHC:8438
ii) The judgment and award dated 20.09.2021 passed
in MVC.No.4078/2019 by IX ASCJ, Small Causes
and Additional MACT, Bengaluru, (SCCH-7)is
modified;
iii) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of
Rs.7,60,172/- as against Rs.3,30,000/- awarded
by the tribunal along with interest @ 6% p.a. from
the date of petition till realization;
iv) The entire compensation amount shall be paid by
the respondent within a period of four weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order;
v) The compensation amount shall be released in
favour of the appellant - claimant upon proper
verification;
vi) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the
tribunal shall stand intact;
vii) The original records shall be transmitted to the
jurisdictional tribunal forthwith;
Sd/-
JUDGE
AM
