Karnataka High Court
Sri G Somashekar vs National Insurance Co Ltd on 28 June, 2024
Author: Hemant Chandangoudar
Bench: Hemant Chandangoudar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:24347
MFA No. 2451 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2451 OF 2018 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI. G. SOMASHEKAR,
S/O G. CHENGALRAYAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS,
R/O NO.31-165, T.S. AGRAHAAM, PALAMNER,
CHITTOOR DISTRICT - 741 202.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GURUDEVA PRASAD K.T, ADVOCATE AND
SRI. H.R. SATHYAPAL HEGDE, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
T.P. HUB, 2ND FLOOR,
SHUBHARAM COMPELX, M.G. ROAD,
BENGALURU - 560 002, BY ITS MANAGER.
2. SRI. G. SHIVA SHANKAR,
S/O G. CHENGALRAYAPPA,
Digitally signed by B
K NO.31-165, WARD NO.3,
MAHENDRAKUMAR
Location: HIGH POLICE LINE, ADIDRAVIDA STREET,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA FOREST BUNGLAW, WEST FOREST BUILDING,
PALMNER, CHITTOOR DISTRICT,
ANDHRA PRADESH - 741 202.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. E.I. SANMATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
VIDE ORDER DATED 18.12.2023, NOTICE TO R2 IS HELD
SUFFICIENT)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25/09/2017, PASSED IN MVC
NO.2100/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDL. SMALL CAUSES
JUDGE & XXXIV ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER,
MACT-7, BENGALURU (SCCH-7), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:24347
MFA No. 2451 of 2018
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY,
THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Indian Motor
Vehicles Act challenges the judgment and award dated
25.09.2017, passed by the IX Additional Small Causes Judge &
Member MACT, Bengaluru, in MVC No. 2100/2016.
2. The claimant, having sustained injuries in an accident,
filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Indian Motor Vehicles
Act, seeking just and proper compensation. The Tribunal awarded
a sum of Rs.2,21,960/- as compensation. However, the liability was
imposed on the owner of the goods vehicle to pay the
compensation. Taking exception to this, the claimant has filed this
appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation and challenging
the imposition of liability on the owner of the goods vehicle.
3. The counsel for both parties was heard, and the trial
court records were perused.
4. The appellant/claimant asserts that on 17.12.2013,
while he was travelling in a TATA ACE goods vehicle along with
silk cocoons, the driver of the vehicle drove rashly and negligently,
resulting in a collision with a vehicle coming from the opposite
direction. Following an investigation, the police submitted a charge
sheet against the owner of the goods vehicle, stating that the
NC: 2024:KHC:24347
claimant was travelling in the goods vehicle along with silk
cocoons. However, the Tribunal dismissed this assertion, stating
that the claimant failed to produce any documents to substantiate
that he was travelling in the goods vehicle with goods and therefore
held that the claimant was a gratuitous passenger.
5. During the investigation, the police drew up a mahazar
(a site inspection report), which indicated that the claimant was
indeed travelling along with silk cocoons. The claimant consistently
maintained that he was travelling in the goods vehicle, and nothing
was elicited in cross-examination to discredit this claim.
6. Therefore, the findings recorded by the Tribunal that
the claimant was travelling as a gratuitous passenger are without
any substance.
7. Although the insurance premium was paid to cover the
driver and owner, in accordance with the provisions of Section
147(1)(b)(i) of the Indian Motor Vehicles Act, the Insurance
Company is liable to pay the compensation amount.
8. The accident occurred in 2013, and the claimant was
20 years old at the time. The claimant sustained a fracture of the
middle third of the femur (transverse right), abrasions over the
dorsum of the left foot, swelling of both legs, and other grievous
injuries. He was hospitalized for 19 days. The doctor, who was
examined as PW-2, assessed the permanent disability of the lower
limb at 48% and functional disability at 16%. However, the Tribunal
assessed the functional disability at 8%.
NC: 2024:KHC:24347
9. Considering the severity of the injuries, the age of the
claimant, and the resulting disabilities, the claimant seeks an
enhancement of the compensation awarded and a revision of the
liability imposed by the Tribunal.
10. Given the nature of injuries suffered, the
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is re-assessed as follows:
As awarded As awarded
Compensation under by the by this Court
different Heads Tribunal (Rs.)
(Rs.)
Pain and sufferings 50,000 65,000
Food, nourishment, and 10,000 20,000
attendant charges.
Loss of income during laid 21,000 21,000
up period
Towards loss of amenities ----- 30,000
Towards Future medical 20,000 20,000
expenses
Loss of future income due to 1,20,960 1,72,800
permanent disability
Total 2,21,960 3,28,800
11. In the result, the appeal is allowed-in-part. The
judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified. The claimant is
entitled for a total compensation of Rs.3,28,800/- as against
Rs.2,21,960/- awarded by the Tribunal.
NC: 2024:KHC:24347
12. The enhanced compensation amount of Rs.1,06,840/-
(i.e. Rs.3,28,800 - Rs.2,21,960) shall carry interest at the rate of
6% per annum from the date of the appeal till the date of
realization. The respondent No.1 - Insurance Company before the
Tribunal is fastened with the liability to pay the entire compensation
amount inclusive of interest.
To this extent, the impugned judgment and award stands
modified.
Sd/-
JUDGE
DHA
