Karnataka High Court
Ramazan vs Shankar on 2 January, 2024
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:30
MFA No. 22443 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 22443 OF 2012 (MV)
BETWEEN:
RAMZAN
S/O. MAKABUL SHAIKH
AGED ABOUT: 36 YEARS, OCC: FABRICATION WORK IN
STEEL FACTOR NOW NIL
R/O: PAGA GALLI, TASAGAON,
TALUKA: TASAGAON, DIST: SANGLI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. K.ANANDKUMAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHRI. SHANKAR SHIVALING KHERADKAR,
AGE: MAJOR, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: SIDDESHWAR ROAD, VANDE MATARAM CHOUK,
TASAGAON, TQ: TASAGAON, DIST: SANGLI.
Digitally
signed by 2. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE, CO. LTD.,
BHARATHI
BHARATHI H M THROUGH DIVISIONAL OFFICE,
HM Date: CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI, REPRESENTED BY
2024.01.11
11:40:30 ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER.
+0530
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. ASHOK A.NAIK, FOR R1;
SRI. M.K. SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD
DATED 06.08.2011 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1697/2010 ON THE FILE OF
THE PRESIDING OFFICER, FAST TRACK COURT-IV, BELAGAVI,
PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:30
MFA No. 22443 of 2012
THIS MISCELLANEOUS SECOND APPEAL, COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri. K. Anandkumar, learned counsel for the
appellant and learned counsel Sri. M K. Soudagar representing
respondent No.2.
2. Though the matter is listed for admission, with the
consent of the parties matter is taken for final disposal.
3. Claimants appeal seeking enhancement of the
compensation in respect of the motor vehicle accident which is
occurred on 29.09.2009 at 1.30 hours when claimant was
proceeding on TVS Star MH-10/AD-6813 from Sangli to
Tasagaon with self riding and the accident occurred near
Kavathe Sangli Tasagaon road.
4. The Insurance Company opposed the claim petition
by filing written statement.
5. The Trial Court taking note of the material evidence
placed on record especially in the absence of any medical
records except the bills and prescription set to have been
issued by the Dr. Santosh Prabhu, M.S.M. CH. (NEURO),
Neurosurgeon, who is examined as PW-2, allowed the claim
NC: 2024:KHC-D:30
petition in part granting sum of Rs.20,000/- as global
compensation.
6. Sri. K. Anandkumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner reiterating the grounds urged in the appeal memo,
vehemently contended that the claimant has sustained grievous
injuries and therefore they approached the Trial Court for
suitable compensation. But the Trial Court without properly
appreciating the case of claimant, granted meager sum of
Rs.20,000/- only for want of medical records especially when
the treating doctor has been examined on behalf of the
complainant as PW-2, which has resulted in miscarriage of
justice and sought for allowing the appeal.
7. Per contra, Sri. M. K. Soudagar, learned counsel for
the Insurance Company contended that the impugned
judgment is perfectly valid inasmuch as there is no medical
records to show that what exactly the injury that has been
suffered by the claimant. As such Trial Court based on the
materials available on record, has rightly assessed the
compensation in a sum of Rs.20,000/- as global compensation
and sought for dismissal of the appeal.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:30
8. In the light of the rival contention of the parties,
this Court perused the material on record including the Trial
Court records.
9. On such perusal, it is seen that the claimant has
failed to produce the medical records, whereas he has only
produced the bills and the prescriptions.
10. The learned counsel Sri. M K. Soudagar,
representing the respondent vehemently contended that the
bills issued by the Paras Medical Centre, Kolhapur. No efforts
have been made by the Insurance Company before the Trial
Court to find the veracity of the same and produced necessary
evidence before the Court.
11. Taking note of the fact that the number of bills and
number of prescriptions issued and the oral testimony of PWs-1
and 2, this Court is of the considered opinion that enhancing
the global compensation in a sum of Rs.20,000/- to
Rs.60,000/- without interest would meet the ends of justice in
the case on hand.
12. Accordingly, the following order is passed:
NC: 2024:KHC-D:30
ORDER
a) Appeal is allowed in part.
b) As against compensation of Rs.20,000/- ordered by
the Trial Court, the claimant would be entitled to sum
of Rs.60,000/- without any interest.
c) Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
PMP
CT:UMD
