Karnataka High Court

Sri Manjunatha R vs Sri Sathish Babu S R on 29 July, 2024

Author: H.T. Narendra Prasad

Bench: H.T. Narendra Prasad

                                                 -1-
                                                              NC: 2024:KHC:29681
                                                         MFA No. 2673 of 2018




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                               DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

                                              BEFORE
                           THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
                      MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2673 OF 2018 (MV)
                      BETWEEN:

                      SRI MANJUNATHA R
                      S/O RANGAPPA
                      AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
                      R/O GOWRIPURA VILLAGE
                      CHITRADURGA TALUK
                      AND DISTRICT-577501
                                                                    ...APPELLANT
                      (BY SMT. V RAJANI, ADVCOATE FOR
                      SRI. B PRAMOD., ADVOCATE)
                      AND:

                      1.    SRI SATHISH BABU S R
                            S/O RUDRAMUNIYAPPA
                            MAJOR,
                            R/O OPP.KPTCL, CHITRADURGA ROAD
Digitally signed by         CHALLAKERE TOWN-577522.
HEMALATHA A
Location: HIGH
COURT OF              2.  THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER
KARNATAKA
                          ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD.,
                          BRANCH OFFICE, HOUSER MAIN ROAD,
                          MADIVAL, BENGALURU-560068.
                                                             ...RESPONDENTS
                      (BY SRI. B.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2:
                      SRI. M S CHANDRASHEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1)

                           THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
                      AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:20.12.2017
                      PASSED IN MVC NO.569/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE IST
                      ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT-IV,
                      CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
                             -2-
                                         NC: 2024:KHC:29681
                                       MFA No. 2673 of 2018




COMPENSATION       AND    SEEKING      ENHANCEMENT       OF
COMPENSATION.

    THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:


CORAM:     HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD


                    ORAL JUDGMENT

1. This appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles

Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has been

filed by the claimant being aggrieved by the judgment

dated 20.12.2017 passed by the I Additional Senior Civil

Judge and Additional MACT-IV, Chitradurga (hereinafter

referred to as 'the Tribunal') in MVC No.569/2017.

2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly

stated are that on 10.04.2017 at 1.30 p.m., when the

claimant was proceeding on motorcycle bearing

registration No.KA-27/ED-9585 from Challakere to Hiriyur

Town, at that time, a car bearing registration No.KA-16/M-

6686 being driven by its driver at a high speed and in a

rash and negligent manner, dashed to the vehicle of the

NC: 2024:KHC:29681

claimant. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the

claimant sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized.

3. The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the

Act, seeking compensation. It was pleaded that he spent

significant amount towards medical expenses, conveyance

charges and other related costs. It was further pleaded

that the accident occurred solely on account of rash and

negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

4. Upon service of notice, the respondent Nos. 1 and 2

appeared through counsel and filed written statements

denying the averments made in the claim petition.

5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the

Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter, recorded

the evidence. The claimant, in order to prove the case,

examined himself as PW-1, and Dr.Dinesh was examined

as PW-2, and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to

Ex.P12. On behalf of the respondents, no witness was

examined but got exhibited document namely Ex.R1. The

NC: 2024:KHC:29681

Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia,

held that the accident took place on account of rash and

negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver, as a

result of which, the claimant sustained injuries. The

Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled to a

compensation of Rs.3,07,110/- along with interest at the

rate of 6% p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to

deposit the compensation amount along with interest.

Being aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed.

6. The learned counsel for the claimant has submitted

as follows:

a) Firstly, the Tribunal erred in assuming the monthly

income of the claimant as Rs.7,000/-, despite evidence

showing he earned Rs.20,000/- per month by working as a

driver and carrying out agriculture.

b) Secondly, due to the accident, the claimant has

sustained grievous injuries. He was treated as inpatient for

a period of 10 days. Even after discharge from the

hospital, he was not in a position to discharge his regular

NC: 2024:KHC:29681

work. He has suffered lot of pain during treatment.

Considering the same, the compensation awarded by the

Tribunal under the heads of 'loss of amenities', 'pain and

sufferings' and other incidental expenses are on the lower

side and the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation

under the head 'loss of income during laid-up period'.

With the above submissions, learned counsel for the

appellant sought to allow the appeal.

7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the

Insurance Company raised the following counter-

contentions:

a) Firstly, the assertion of claimant that he was earning

Rs.20,000/- per month, remains unsubstantiated due to

lack of documentary evidence. In the absence of proof of

income, the Tribunal has assessed the income of the

claimant notionally.

b) Secondly, the Tribunal considering the injuries

sustained by the claimant and evidence of the doctor, has

rightly assessed the whole body disability at 13%.

NC: 2024:KHC:29681

c) Thirdly, the injuries suffered by the claimant are

minor in nature and he was inpatient only for 10 days and

there is no functional disability. The Tribunal has erred in

considering the addition of future prospects.

d) Fourthly, considering the injuries sustained by the

claimant and considering the age and avocation of the

claimant, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under

the heads of 'loss of amenities', 'pain and sufferings' and

other incidental expenses are just and reasonable and it

does not warrant interference.

With the above submissions, learned counsel for the

Insurance Company sought to dismiss the appeal.

8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and

perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.

9. It is not in dispute that the claimant has sustained

injuries in the road traffic accident occurred on 10.04.2017

due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle

by its driver.

NC: 2024:KHC:29681

10. The claimant claims that he was earning Rs.20,000/-

per month. But he has not produced any documents to

substantiate his claim. Therefore, in the absence of proof

of income, notional income has to be assessed. According

to the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal

Services Authority, for accidents occurred in the year

2017, notional income shall be taken at Rs.11,000/- p.m.

11. As per wound certificate, the claimant has sustained

fracture of both bones of right leg and other injuries.

Taking into consideration the deposition of the doctor and

injuries mentioned in the wound certificate, the Tribunal

has rightly taken the whole body disability at 13%. There

is no functional disability. But, the Tribunal erred in

considering addition of future prospects. The claimant was

aged about 33 years at the time of the accident and

multiplier applicable to his age group is '16'. Thus, the

claimant is entitled for compensation of Rs.2,74,560/-

(Rs.11,000*12*16*13%) on account of 'loss of future

income'.

NC: 2024:KHC:29681

12. The nature of injuries indicates that the claimant

must have been under rest and treatment for a period of

three months. Consequently, the claimant is entitled for

compensation of Rs.33,000/- (Rs.11,000*3 months) under

the head 'loss of income during laid up period'.

13. The claimant was hospitalized as an inpatient for

more than 10 days in the hospital and subsequently

received further treatment. Due to the accident, the

claimant has suffered grievous injuries and also undergone

surgery. Considering the prolonged pain during treatment

as well as the permanent disability certified by the doctor,

I am inclined to enhance the compensation awarded by

the Tribunal under the head of 'pain and sufferings' from

Rs.6,000/- to Rs.40,000/- and under the head of 'loss of

amenities' from Rs.30,000/- to Rs.40,000/-.

14. Considering the nature of injuries, the compensation

awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is just and

reasonable.

NC: 2024:KHC:29681

15. Thus, the claimant is entitled to the following

compensation:

                              As awarded        As awarded
                                by the            by this
     Compensation under
                               Tribunal            Court
       different Heads
                                   (Rs.)          (Rs.)

 Pain and sufferings                    6,000          40,000

 Medical expenses                      16,502          16,502

 Food, nourishment,                    10,000          10,000
 conveyance and
 attendant charges

 Loss of income during                     0           33,000
 laid up period

 Loss of amenities                     30,000          40,000

 Loss of future income              244,608           274,560

                 Total             3,07,110       4,14,062

16. In the result, the following order is passed: