Karnataka High Court
Kamalamma W/O Mallappa Kirawad vs M S Palaksha on 9 January, 2024
Author: V.Srishananda
Bench: V.Srishananda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:438
MFA No. 23749 of 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 9TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.SRISHANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.23749 OF 2012 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SMT. KAMALAMMA W/O MALLAPPA KIRAWAD,
AGE: 55 YEARS, OCC: COOLIE,
R/O: KOD VILLAGE, TQ: HIREKERUR,
DIST: HAVERI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. B.S. SANGATI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MR. M.S. PALAKSHA
AGE: MAJOR, NO. 58, 5TH MAIN,
J.L. PURAM, MYSURU.
2. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
SUJATA COMPLEX, P.B. ROAD, HUBLI.
3. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
N.W.K.R.T.C, GOKUL ROAD,
HOSUR, HUBLI.
REP. BY ITS DEPOT MANAGER,
Digitally
signed by NWKRTC, HIREKERUR DEPOT,
BHARATHI HIREKERUR.
BHARATHI H M
HM Date: ...RESPONDENTS
2024.01.22 (BY SRI. SHARMILA M.PATIL, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
15:16:41
+0530 SRI. V.P. KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNSER
SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD DATED 05-06-2010 PASSED IN MVC NO.36/2007 ON THE
FILE OF CIVIL JUDGE (SR.DN) AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT AND
ITENERATE COURT AT HIREKERUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:438
MFA No. 23749 of 2012
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL, COMING ON FOR
ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Though the matter is listed for admission, by consent of
parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
2. Heard Shri. B. S. Sangati, learned counsel for the
appellant and Smt. Sharmila S. Patil, learned counsel for
respondent No.2.
3. In respect of road traffic accident occurred on
07.03.2006 at about 9.00 p.m. on Masur-Honnali road, near
Tadakanahalli village involving autorikshaw bearing temporary
registration No.TR.KA-25/C-5009 and KSRTC bus bearing
registration No.KA-09/A-1654, claim petition came to be filed
by the appellant who is an injured.
4. Smt. Kamalamma admittedly did not place any
material on record as to her earning capacity and therefore, the
Tribunal considered the notional income and allowed the
compensation for the injuries sustained by her by granting
compensation in a sum of Rs.69,800/- with interest at the rate
of 6% per annum.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:438
5. Shri. B. S. Sangati, learned counsel for the
appellant reiterating the grounds urged in the appeal contended
that on the head of pain and suffering meagre sum of
Rs.10,000/- is awarded and so also on the heads of income
during laid up period and loss of amenities, no amount is
awarded and also contended that disability factor is taken as
10% as against the assessed disability factor is of 35%,
resulting in miscarriage of justice.
6. Per contra, Smt. Sharmila S. Patil, learned counsel
for respondent No.2 supports the impugned judgment
contended that in the year 2007 the claim of the claimant has
been properly considered by awarding sum of Rs.69,800/-
which is just and proper and sought for dismissal of the appeal.
7. In view of the rival contentions of the parties, this
Court perused the material on record meticulously.
8. On such perusal, accident is not in dispute. The
claimant has suffered two fractures i.e., fracture of right
clavicle bone and right side multiple ribs fracture. A sum of
Rs.10,000/- is awarded on the head of pain and suffering is too
low. So also on the other heads namely loss of amenities and
loss of income during the laid up period has not been
NC: 2024:KHC-D:438
considered by the Tribunal, enhancing the compensation in a
sum of Rs.25,000/- globally would meet the ends of justice.
9. Accordingly, the following order is passed:
ORDER
(i) Appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The claimant would be entitled to a sum
of Rs.94,800/- with interest at the rate of 6% per
annum as against the compensation awarded by
the Tribunal.
(iii) The Insurance Company is granted four
weeks time to deposit the balance amount of
compensation.
(iv) Ordered accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SMM
