Karnataka High Court
Tammanna vs Ananthreddy.V And Anr on 4 January, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:159
MFA No. 202212 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 202212/2018(MV)
BETWEEN:
TAMMANNA S/O BHIMSHA @ BHIMANNA,
AGE: 68 YEARS,
OCC: HAIR CUTTING SHOP BUSINESS,
NOW NIL,
R/O. VILLAGE MOGALA, TQ:CHITTAPUR,
DIST: KALABURAGI, NOW R/AT VILLAGE
KUSNOOR,
TQ & DIST: KALABURAGI.
Digitally signed
by ...APPELLANT
KHAJAAMEEN
L MALAGHAN (BY SRI SANJEEV PATIL, ADVOCATE)
Location: High
Court of
Karnataka AND:
1. ANANTHREDDY V. S/O SHESHI REDDY
AGE: MAJOR OCC: BUSINESS OWNER OF AUTO
BEARING NO.AP-22/TV-0522
R/O. H.NO. 3-15, NADUGURTHY-V,
UTKOOR-M,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:159
MFA No. 202212 of 2018
MAHABOOB NAGAR,
TELANGANA-509001.
2. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
10003-E-8, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA,
SITAPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN-302022,
REPT. BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SUBHASH MALLAPUR ADV. FOR R2;
R1-V/O DATED 11.12.2018 NOTICE DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV
ACT, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
PASSED BY THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT,
CHITTAPUR, IN MVC NO.222/2014 DATED 29.08.2017, BY
ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED FOR, IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This Appeal is filed by the claimant aggrieved by the
judgment and award passed in M.V.C. No.222/2014 by
the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Chittapur, ('Tribunal'),
dated 29.08.2017, seeking enhancement of
compensation.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:159
2. The claim petition was filed seeking
compensation of an amount of Rs.15,00,000/-, on
account of the injuries suffered by the claimant in the
road traffic accident. It is the case of the claimant that
he was aged 65 years at the time of accident and by
running a hair cutting shop he was earning Rs.6,000/- per
month.
3. The respondents filed written statement
denying the material averments of the claim petition. It is
stated that the claim of the claimant under various heads
is very high and out of proportion. The claimant in
support of his case, examined PWs.1 and 2, and got
marked Exs.P1 to P7. On behalf of the respondent-
Insurance Company, examined RW1 and Exs.R1 to R4
were marked.
4. As per PW2 - the Doctor, claimant had
sustained fracture of proximal ends of tibia and fibula of
leg knee and assessed 21% disability to whole body.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:159
5. The Tribunal had taken the income of the
claimant at Rs.6,000/- per month and observed that
Ex.P7 - X-ray report shows that there is evidence of old
mal united fracture of proximal ends of left tibia and
fibula and mild to moderate O.A. changes seen in left
knee joint and came to the conclusion that the disability
assessed by the Doctor is on the higher side and taking
7% disability to the whole body granted the compensation
of Rs.72,000/- as per the following heads:
Heads Compensation
Awarded
1 Pain and suffering : Rs. 25,000/-
2 Medical expenses : Rs. 5,000/-
3 Diet and attendant charges : Rs. 5,000/-
4 Loss of future earnings : Rs. 35,280/-
5 Loss of income during : Rs. 2,000/-
treatment period
TOTAL : Rs. 72,280/-
Rounded off : Rs. 72,000/-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:159
6. Learned counsel appearing for the claimant
submits that when the claimant had sustained two
fractures, towards pain and suffering and diet, attendant
amount that was granted by the Tribunal is on the lower
side. Even for loss of income during laid up period only
Rs.2,000/- is granted. He submits that the claimant was
working as Barbar, continuous standing is required,
without considering these aspects the Tribunal has taken
only 7% disability.
7. Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance
Company submits that the Tribunal rightly considered the
income and granted the compensation and no grounds are
made out for enhancement of the compensation.
8. Having heard the learned counsels on either
sides perused the material on record.
9. Considering the evidence of the Doctor and the
occupation of the claimant, this Court is inclined to take
10% disability to the whole body. Further, considering the
NC: 2024:KHC-K:159
injuries and fractures suffered by the claimant, towards
'pain and suffering' an amount of Rs.60,000/- is
awarded. Towards medical expenses, the Tribunal has
rightly granted an amount of Rs.5,000/-, which warrants
no interference.
10. Towards 'attendant charges, transportation
and food and nourishment' as the claimant was in
hospital for 17 days as inpatient, he is entitled for an
amount of Rs.17,000/-. Coming to the heads 'loss of
income during laid up period', considering the injuries
and the treatment undergone by the claimant, three
months salary (Rs.6,000/- x 3) 'Rs.18,000/-' is awarded.
11. Towards loss of amenities the Tribunal has not
awarded any compensation. Injuries have embarked on
his future life and happiness, hence, under the head 'loss
of amenities' 'Rs.25,000/-' is awarded.
12. 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:159
MALATHI AND ANOTHER1, the claimant is entitled for an
amount of 'Rs.10,000/-' towards 'legal expenses'.
13. The claimant is therefore, entitled to the
compensation under the following heads:
Heads Compensation
Awarded
1 Loss of income due to disability : Rs. 50,400/-
(6,000 x 12 x 7 x 10/100)
2 Pain and Sufferings : Rs. 60,000/-
Loss of Earning during laid up : Rs. 18,000/-
3 period
(Rs.6,000 x 3 )
4 Medical Nourishment (Kept In
: Rs. 5,000/-
Tact)
5 Attendant, transport & diet and : Rs. 17,000/-
nourishment
6 Loss of Amenities & Future : Rs. 25,000/-
Discomfort
7 Legal Expenses : Rs. 10,000/-
TOTAL : Rs. 1,85,400/-
(2014) 11 SCC 178
NC: 2024:KHC-K:159
14. Accordingly, the Appeal is allowed-in-part,
enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.72,000/- to
Rs.1,85,400/-.
i) The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6%
p.a., from the date of petition till the date of
realization.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:159
iv) No costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand
closed.
Sd/-
Judge
SBS
