Karnataka High Court

Sri P Narayana Murthy vs The Manager on 6 March, 2024

Author: Jyoti Mulimani

Bench: Jyoti Mulimani

                                                -1-
                                                            NC: 2024:KHC:9512
                                                        MFA No. 3248 of 2014




                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                             DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024

                                             BEFORE
                            THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI
                    MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3248 OF 2014(MV-I)
                   BETWEEN:

                   SRI. P.NARAYANA MURTHY
                   S/O PILLAPPA,
                   AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS,
                   R/AT NO.10, BEHIND LAKSHMI TEMPLE,
                   SONNENAHALLI, ULLAL UPANAGAR POST,
                   KENGERI HOBLI, BANGALORE-56.
                                                                 ...APPELLANT
                   (BY SMT. SUGUNA.R.REDDY., ADVOCATE)

                   AND:

                   1.     THE MANAGER,
                          M/S UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD.,
                          NO.40, LAKSHMI COMPLEX, K.R.ROAD,
                          BANGALORE-02.

Digitally signed by 2. SRI. M.P.KRISHNEGOWDA
THEJASKUMAR N          S/O PUTTEGOWDA,
Location: HIGH
COURT OF               AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
KARNATAKA              R/AT NO.6, 6TH CROSS, MARIYAPPANAPALYA,
                       NEAR HOTEL, JANANABHARATHI POST,
                       BANGALURU.
                                                            ...RESPONDENTS
                   (BY SRI. KRISHNA.B.S., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
                       NOTICE TO R2-DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED:27.06.2016)

                           THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER
                   SECTION 173(1) OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988,
                   AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 02.12.2013
                   PASSED IN MVC NO.5314/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI
                                 -2-
                                               NC: 2024:KHC:9512
                                          MFA No. 3248 of 2014




A.C.M.M.   AND   XXIII   A.S.C.J.,    MACT,   COURT   OF   SMALL
CAUSES, BENGALURU.

     THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS COMING ON FOR
HEARING,     THIS     DAY,    THE     COURT    DELIVERED     THE
FOLLOWING:
                             JUDGMENT

Smt.Suguna R.Reddy., learned counsel for the appellant

has appeared through video conferencing.

Sri.Krishna.B.S., learned counsel for respondent No.1 has

appeared in person.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties shall be

referred to as per their status and rankings before the Tribunal.

3. It is the case of the claimant that on the 18th day of

January 2012 he was riding the motorcycle bearing Registration

No.KA-05 HG-7821 on Amma Ashram Road, Gnanabharathi at

about 4:00 pm., when he reached near I Cross junction, the

driver of Maruti Omni Car bearing Registration No.KA-02 N-989

drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and hit the

motorcycle. Due to the impact, the claimant fell down and

sustained grievous injuries. He was shifted to Pristine Hospital

NC: 2024:KHC:9512

wherein he took treatment as an in-patient. Contending that

the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the

Maruti Omni Car, the claimant filed claim petition seeking

compensation.

In response to the notice, the second respondent

remained absent before the Tribunal and hence, he was placed

ex-parte. The first respondent Insurance Company appeared

through its counsel and filed objections and denied the petition

averments. Among other grounds, it prayed for dismissal of the

petition.

Based on the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed

issues, parties led evidence and marked the documents. The

Tribunal vide Judgment dated:02.12.2013 partly allowed the

petition. It is this Judgment that is called into question in this

appeal on several grounds as set-out in the Memorandum of

appeal.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

Judgment of the Tribunal is contrary to the evidence on record

and law.

NC: 2024:KHC:9512

Next, she submits that the Tribunal has erred in awarding

a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) towards

pain and suffering.

A further submission is made that the Tribunal has erred

in awarding meagre amount under other heads.

Lastly, she submits that viewed from any angle the

Tribunal has erred in awarding meagre compensation.

Therefore, she submits that the award of the Tribunal requires

interference and accordingly, prayed to allow the appeal.

Learned counsel for the Insurance Company justified the

Judgment of the Tribunal. He submits that the appeal is devoid

of merits and the same may be dismissed.

Heard, the contentions urged on behalf of the respective

parties and perused the appeal papers and also the records

with utmost care.

5. The point that would arise for consideration is

whether the Claimant is entitled for enhanced compensation?

6. The facts are sufficiently stated and do not require

reiteration. The Claimant's appeal is one for enhancement of

NC: 2024:KHC:9512

compensation and modification of the judgment. The Tribunal

taking note of the material evidence on record concluded that

the Claimant sustained injuries due to the actionable negligence

on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle.

The grounds urged in the present appeal are mainly

relating to the meager compensation awarded under different

heads by the Tribunal. The Claimant has suffered pain and

agony owing to the injuries sustained in the accident in

question. Hence, this Court deems it appropriate to award

Rs.60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand only) towards pain and

suffering as against Rs.40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only)

awarded by the Tribunal.

The amount of Rs.1,30,400/- (Rupees One Lakh Thirty

Thousand Four Hundred only) towards Medical Expenses

remains intact.

This Court deems it appropriate to award Rs.21,000/-

(Rupees Twenty One Thousand only) towards Loss of income

during laid up period as against Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten

Thousand only); Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only)

towards loss of amenities as against Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten

NC: 2024:KHC:9512

Thousand only) and Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only)

towards Transport, special diet and attendant charges as

against Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only).

It is noticed that the Tribunal has not awarded

compensation towards permanent disability. Therefore, this

Court deems it appropriate to award compensation towards

Permanent disability. It is contended that the claimant was

working as a Supervisor Mason and was earning salary of

Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand per month).

However, there is no proof of income. In the absence of any

proof of income, the chart prepared by the Legal Service

Authority must be taken into consideration. As per the chart, if

the accident is occurred in the year 2012, the salary of the

injured must be taken as Rs.7,000/- (Rupees Seven Thousand

only) per month. The age of the claimant was 42 years as on

the date of accident, hence the multiplier 14 is to be adopted.

Furthermore, a perusal of evidence of PW2 Doctor reveals that

he has opined that the claimant has about 36% disability in

relation to right lower limb and 12% disability in relation to the

whole body. Therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to

NC: 2024:KHC:9512

consider the disability as 12%. Hence, the amount towards

Permanent disability is calculated as under:

Rs.7,000/- X 12 X 14 X 12/100 = Rs.1,41,120/-

7. Accordingly, this Court re-determines the

compensation as under:-

1. Pain and Sufferings 40,000 + 20,000 Rs.60,000/-

2. Medical Expenses 1,30,400 Rs.1,30,400/-

3. Loss of income during 7,000 X 3 Rs.21,000/- laid up period

4. Loss of amenities 10,000 +10,000 Rs.20,000/-

5. Transport, special diet 20,000 + 10,000 Rs.30,000/- and attendant charges

6. Permanent disability 1,41,120 Rs.1,41,120/-

Total: Rs.4,02,520/-

(Less) Compensation awarded by the -Rs.2,10,400/-

Tribunal:

Enhanced compensation awarded by Rs.1,92,120/-

this Court:

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case

and the prevailing rate of interest during the relevant time, this

Court deems it appropriate to award interest at the rate of 6%

NC: 2024:KHC:9512

per annum on the enhanced compensation amount from the

date of claim petition till realization.

8. Hence, the following:

ORDER

1. The Miscellaneous First appeal is

allowed in part and the Judgment

dated:02.12.2013 passed by the Motor Accident

Claims Tribunal, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru

in M.V.C No.5314/2012 is modified to the extent

stated hereinabove.

2. The claimant is entitled for the enhanced

compensation of Rs.1,92,120/- (Rupees One Lakh

Ninety Two Thousand One Hundred and Twenty

only) with interest at the rate of 6% per annum

from the date of the claim petition till the date of

realization.

3. The first respondent - Insurance

Company shall deposit the enhanced compensation

amount along with 6% interest within a period of

NC: 2024:KHC:9512

two months from the date of receipt of the certified

copy of this Judgment.