Karnataka High Court
Parmeshwar vs Ramachandra And Ors on 26 June, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4289
MFA No. 202264 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH M ADIGA
MISC. FIRST APPEAL NO. 202264 OF 2017 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
PARMESHWAR S/O VITHAL JADHAV
AGE: 53 YEARS, OCC: DRIVER,
R/O. SIDDEWADI, TQ. PANDHARPUR,
DIST. SOLAPUR AND ALSO RESIDING AT,
SHAKTINAGAR, VIJAYAPUR-586103.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI BIRADAR VIRANAGOUDA, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. RAMACHANDRA S/O KISHANRAO PATIL,
AGE: 45 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O. BHATKHEDA, TQ. DIST. LATUR,
Digitally signed by MAHARASTRA STATE- 413232.
SHIVALEELA
DATTATRAYA UDAGI
Location: HIGH
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER
COURT OF NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.
KARNATAKA
HANAMASHETTY BUILDING, GURUKULA ROAD,
VIJAYAPURA-586101.
3. DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER
MSRTC, BHUDAVAR PETH,
SOLAPUR-413001,
BUS NO.MH-14/BT-2717
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI SANJAY M. JOSHI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
SRI RAHUL R. ASTURE, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
R1 IS SERVED)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4289
MFA No. 202264 of 2017
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S. 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING TO
ALLOW THIS APPEAL BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND
AWARD OF IV ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE
AND MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.XIII,
VIJAYAPUR DATED 29.11.2016 IN MVC.NO.569/2013.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This is claimant's appeal for enhancement of
compensation award by the MACT-Vijayapura (hereinafter
referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short) in MVC No.569/2013
dated 29.11.2016.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per their ranks before the Tribunal.
3. Brief facts of the case are that on 18.03.2013 at
about 12:15 a.m. the petitioner and others were traveling
in a bus bearing Reg.No.MH-14/BT-2717. Near Nagaj
Phata, on Miraj-Pandharpur road, it met with an accident
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4289
due to rash and negligent driving of truck bearing
Reg.No.MH-24/AB-6611 by its driver. As a result of which,
the persons who were traveling in the bus sustained
simple and grievous injuries and one of the passengers
had died at the spot of accident.
4. The petitioner, who was traveling in the bus,
sustained fracture of right elbow coronoid grade-I fracture
with scaphoid. He has taken treatment in Nikkam hospital
at Pandharapur. He had spent more than Rs.1,00,000/-
towards treatment.
5. It is further case of the petitioner that he was
aged about 48 years and working as driver in MSRTC and
drawing salary of Rs.25,000/- per month. Due to the
injuries sustained in the accident, he has been suffering
from permanent disability, affecting his earning capacity.
With these reasons prayed to award compensation of
Rs.10,00,000/-.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4289
6. Respondents in their written statement denied
the contents of the claim petition and it is also contended
that accident had taken place due to negligence of the
driver of the bus also. With these reasons prayed to
dismiss the claim petition.
7. From the rival contentions of both the parties,
the Tribunal had framed the necessary issues for its
determination.
8. The Tribunal has clubbed the MVC.Nos.568,
569, 570 and 1455 of 2013 and recorded the common
evidence and passed a common judgment.
9. The claimants in support of their case examined
PWs.1 to 5 and got marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.28. The
respondent No.2 examined RW.1 and got marked Ex.R.1.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4289
10. The Tribunal after hearing both the parties and
appreciating the evidence available on record had awarded
the following amount of compensation:-
Sl. Heads of Compensation Amount
No. (in Rs.)
01. Pain and suffering 30,000/-
02. Medical Expenses 25,000/-
Total 55,000/-
11. I have heard the learned counsels for the
claimant and respondents No.2 and 3.
12. The learned counsel for the claimant would
submit that the Tribunal has not considered the case of
the claimant properly. No amount of compensation is
awarded towards attendant charges, conveyance charges
and loss of amenities. Even the medical expenses is
awarded is also meager one. Therefore, prayed for
enhancement of the compensation.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4289
13. The learned counsel for the respondent No.2
contends that the Tribunal has awarded the just
compensation and it does not call for any interference. The
claimant is a Government servant and he continued his
service even after the accident. There is no change in his
income. Therefore, there is no need of enhancement of the
compensation.
14. The following question arises for my
consideration;
"Whether the claimant is entitled for
enhancement of the compensation?"
15. The fact of accident, injuries to the claimant
due to the vehicle accident are not in dispute. The
claimant had sustained injuries mentioned in the above
paras. He had taken treatment in the private Hospital at
Pandharapur. These facts are also not in dispute.
According to his evidence, he is suffering from permanent
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4289
disability and facing difficulty to do his day to day work.
He had also spent Rs.1,00,000/- towards medical
expenses. Of course it appears that he had not produced
any documents in this regard. He had produced 03
prescriptions, 03 medical bills and x-ray film at Ex.P.14 to
16. Considering the materials available on record, the
amount of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on
lower side.
16. The claimant is permanent Government
Servant. Therefore, he is not entitled for loss of future
earning capacity due to permanent disability. However,
due to the injuries to the right elbow coronoid grade-I
fracture with scaphoid, he might find it difficult to drive the
vehicle. He has to suffer pain and suffering after the
retirement also. Therefore, the Tribunal ought to have
awarded the compensation towards loss of amenities.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4289
17. The Tribunal has not awarded the compensation
towards incidental expenses. Though, the Tribunal has
awarded the compensation towards medical expenses.
Considering the same, the following amount of
compensation is awarded.
Sl. Heads of Compensation Amount
No. (in Rs.)
01. Pain and suffering 30,000/-
02. Medical Expenses 25,000/-
03. Attendant charges, special diet 20,000/-
and conveyance charges etc.,
04. Loss of amenities 50,000/-
Total 1,25,000/-
18. The claimant is entitled for enhancement of
compensation at Rs.70,000/- along with interest at the
rate of 6% per annum from the date of claim petition till
its realization.
19. For the above said discussion, I answered
question No.1 partly in the affirmative and proceed to pass
the following;
NC: 2024:KHC-K:4289
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed in part.
ii. The impugned judgment and award passed by the
Member, MACT-XIII and IV Additional District
Judge, Vijayapura, in MVC.No.569/2013 dated
29.11.2016, is modified;
a) The respondent No.2 - insurance company shall
deposit the said amount with interest within a
period of 06 weeks from the date of receipt of
copy of this order.
b) The amount of enhanced compensation is meager.
Therefore, the entire amount of compensation with
interest, is ordered to be released in favour of the
claimant on due identification.
The registry is directed to send back the Trial Court
records along with copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE
SDU/KJJ
CT:PK
