Karnataka High Court
Faizunnisa W/O Abdulsattar Hurakadli vs Fakkirappa S/O Gutteppa Bakkur on 16 January, 2024
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:1130
MFA No. 24147 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.24147 OF 2012 (MV)
BETWEEN:
SMT. FAIZUNNISA W/O. ABDULSATTAR HURAKADLI,
AGE: 39 YEARS, OCC: TAILORING AND MILK VENDING,
R/O: KODA VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR,
DIST: HAVERI.
NOW AT ISLAMPUR GALLI, RANEBENNUR,
TQ: RANEBENNUR-581115, DIST: HAVERI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. MADANMOHAN M.KHANNUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. FAKKIRAPPA S/O. GUTTEPPA BAKKUR,
AGE: MAJOR (CORRECT AGE NOT KNOWN),
OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: HARALAYYA NAGAR, RANEBENNUR-581115,
DIST: HAVERI.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
Digitally signed
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD.,
by SAMREEN
AYUB DESHNUR
ENKAY COMPLEX, KESHWAPUR,
Date: 2024.02.01 HUBLI-580030, DIST: DHARWAD.
15:38:26 +0530
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. RAJASHEKHAR S.ARAVI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED: 28-06-2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.582/2010 ON THE
FILE OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT,
RANEBENNUR, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL, COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:1130
MFA No. 24147 of 2012
JUDGMENT
Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the
consent of both parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
2. Heard Sri.Madanmohan M Khannur, learned
counsel for the appellant and Sri.Rajashekhar S Arani,
learned counsel for the Insurance Company.
3. The claimant in MVC No.582/2010 has preferred
the present appeal challenging the validity of the
judgment and award passed in the said case dated
28.06.2012 on the file of Additional Motor Accident Claims
Tribunal, Ranebennur, Haveri District.
4. Admitted facts in this case are that the
appellant - claimant suffered accidental injuries on
account of a road traffic accident occurred on 26.04.2009
and therefore, he had laid a claim before the Tribunal.
5. The Tribunal after raising necessary issues and
on considering the oral and documentary evidence placed
NC: 2024:KHC-D:1130
on record, allowed the claim petition by awarding a sum of
Rs.1,94,200/- with interest at 6% per annum.
6. Being aggrieved by awarding inadequate
compensation, the claimant is in appeal.
7. Reiterating the grounds urged in the appeal
memorandum, Sri.Madanmohan M Khannur, learned
counsel for the appellant vehemently contended that the
Tribunal has wrongly assessed the quantum of
compensation and sought for allowing the appeal by
reassessing the quantum of compensation.
8. He also pointed out that as against Rs.5,000/-
as monthly income in respect of accidental injuries
sustained in the year 2009, the Tribunal has considered a
sum of Rs.3,000/- and therefore, a case is made out for
enhancement of compensation and sought for
reassessment of compensation.
9. Per contra, Sri.Rajashekhar S Arani, learned
counsel for the Insurance Company contended that the
NC: 2024:KHC-D:1130
Tribunal has wrongly applied the multiplier of 16 for the
injured who is aged 37 years and it should have been 15
as per the dictum of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Sarla Verma (Smt) and others vs. Delhi Transport
Corporation and another, reported in (2009) 6
Supreme Court Cases 121 and prayed that appropriate
compensation be awarded.
10. In view of the rival contentions of the parties,
this Court perused the material on record meticulously.
11. On such perusal the material on record, a case
has been made out for reassessment of compensation
taking note of the fact that the Tribunal has taken only
Rs.3,000/- as the monthly income as against Rs.5,000/-
per month in the absence of proper proof of income while
assessing loss of future earning.
12. Further, there is also force in the argument put
forth on behalf of Insurance Company that proper
multiplier has not been applied by the Tribunal.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:1130
13. Therefore, the quantum of compensation is
reassessed as under:
Pain and suffering Rs.40,000/-
Medical expenses Rs.22,000/-
Loss of earning Rs.1,80,000/-
(Rs.5,000 x 12 x 15 x
20/100)
Attendant and nourishment Rs.15,000/-
charges
Loss of income during laid Rs.15,000/-
up period (Rs.5,000 x 3
months)
Loss of amenities Rs.25,000/-
Total Rs.2,97,000/-
14. In view of the foregoing discussions, following
order is passed:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) As against Rs.1,94,200/- awarded by the
Tribunal, the claimant would be entitled to
NC: 2024:KHC-D:1130
Rs.2,97,000/- with interest at 6% per annum
from the date of petition till realization.
(iii) Impugned judgment and award passed by the
Tribunal stands modified to the above extent.
(iv) Insurance Company is granted six weeks time
to pay/deposit the balance sum.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SH
