Karnataka High Court
Shri Umesh S/O Pandit Goundi vs Shri C. Shanamugham S/O Chinuswamy And ... on 29 May, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3396-DB
MFA No. 200972 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MAY, 2024
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S. KINAGI
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K
MISCL. FIRST APPEAL NO. 200972 OF 2016 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SHRI UMESH S/O PANDIT GOUNDI
AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC:COOLIE WORK,
R/O: KAP-NIMBARGI,
TQ:INDI, DIST:VIJAYAPUR,
NOW RESIDING AT BANJARA CROSS,
SOLAPUR ROAD, VIJAYAPUR-586103.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SANGANAGOUDA V. BIRADAR, ADVOCATE
FOR SRI. NEMAGOUDA S. R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed
by VARSHA N
RASALKAR 1. SHRI C. SHANAMUGHAM
Location: HIGH S/O CHINNUSWAMY,
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AGE:ABOUT 37 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS,
R/O:49, KARUNKATTU PALANISWAMY STREET,
A.S. PATTI, NAMALLAL-637001.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO.LTD
1ST FLOOR, BIDARI COMPLEX,
ABOVE STATE BANK OF MYSORE
S.S.FRONT ROAD, VIJAYAPUR-586101.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S. S. ASPALLI, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3396-DB
MFA No. 200972 of 2016
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR
VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THIS MISC.FIRST APPEAL
AND ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AS PRAYED FOR IN CLAIM
PETITION BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
09.03.2016 PASSED BY THE LEARNEED MOTOR ACCIDENT
CLAIMS TRIBUNAL NO.VI, VIJAYAPUR IN MVC NO.773/2014, IN
THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY RAJESH RAI K J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for
short) has been filed by the appellant-claimant being
aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 09.03.2016
passed in MVC No.773/2014 by the Court of MACT-VI,
Vijaypur, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal', for
short).
2. For the sake of convenience, parties are
referred to as per their ranking before the Claims Tribunal.
3. The facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal
briefly stated are that, on 22.10.2013 at about 7.00 p.m.,
the petitioner Umesh Goundi was proceeding on
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3396-DB
motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-48/E-7264 with one
Santosh Biradar as a pillion rider. They were proceeding
towards Kapanimbaragi from Nandargi. Near
Kapanimbaragi bridge, a truck bearing registration No.TN-
28/aa-5274 came in a high speed and the driver being
unable to control it and dashed to the motorcycle and
caused the accident.
4. The petitioner was shifted to Tanga Multi
Specialty Hospital, Vjayapur. He took treatment and
admitted as indoor patient for 15 days and incurred
Rs.1,50,000/- towards medical and other expenses. At the
time of accident, the petitioner was aged about 20 years
doing coolie work and getting monthly income of
Rs.10,000/-. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident,
he has been permanently disabled and lost source of
income, causing dent to him financially, mentally and
physically. Hence, he preferred a claim petition seeking
compensation.
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3396-DB
5. After service of notice, respondent No.1-owner
did not appear and placed ex-parte. Respondent No.2
appeared and filed written statement denying the contents
of claim petition and sought for dismissal of the claim
petition.
6. On the basis of pleadings, the Tribunal framed
relevant issues for consideration.
7. In order to substantiate the issues and to
establish the case, petitioner got examined himself as
PW.1 and also examined one doctor as PW.2 and got
marked documents as Exs.P1 to P11. On the other hand,
respondent No.2-Insurer did not adduce any evidence,
however they got marked copy of insurance policy as
Ex.R1.
8. The Tribunal, after recording the evidence and
considering the material on record, allowed the petition in
part and awarded compensation of Rs.2,33,473/- along
with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3396-DB
petition till realization and directed the respondent No.2 to
deposit the compensation amount. Being dissatisfied with
the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the petitioner
has filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of
compensation amount.
9. We have heard the learned counsel for
appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.2-
Insurance Company.
10. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that
the compensation awarded by the tribunal is on the lower
side. It is the vehement contention of the learned counsel
for appellant-petitioner that the tribunal has erred in
awarding inadequate compensation despite placing on
record relevant documents regarding the permanent
disability and seeks indulgence of the Court to allow the
appeal and consequently to enhance the compensation.
11. Per contra, the learned counsel for the
respondent No.2/Insurance Company supports the
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3396-DB
judgment and award passed by the tribunal, contending
that the same does not call for any interference. Hence,
prays to dismiss the appeal.
12. We have perused the records and considered
the submission made by the learned counsel for the
parties.
13. The accidental injuries sustained by the
petitioner and the liability of respondent No.2 to pay the
compensation is not seriously disputed. In order to prove
the negligence on the part of the driver of the offending
truck, the petitioner has produced FIR and charge sheet
which are marked as Exs.P1 and P8. The said documents
discloses that the accident has occurred due to the rash
and negligent driving by the driver of the offending truck.
14. The point that arise for consideration is with
regard to quantum of compensation.
15. Insofar as quantum of compensation is
concerned, the petitioner has contended that prior to the
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3396-DB
accident he was hale and healthy, aged about 20 years
and doing coolie work and earning Rs.10,000/- per month.
Due the accident he has suffered permanent disability. In
order to substantiate the same, he has examined the
doctor as PW.2, who deposed that he has examined the
petitioner and issued disability certificate as per Ex.P16.
The said document discloses that petitioner has suffered
permanent disability to an extent of 25% to right lower
limb. However he has not mentioned disability with regard
to his whole body. Considering the nature of injuries and
the disability, the tribunal has taken the functional
disability of petitioner at 10% which needs to be enhanced
to 20%.
16. The petitioner has not produced any evidence
with regard to his income. Therefore, the notional income
has to be assessed as per the guidelines issued by the
Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. Since the
accident has taken place in the year 2013, the notional
income has to be taken at Rs.7,000/- p.m. The petitioner
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3396-DB
is aged about 20 years at the time of the accident and
multiplier applicable to his age group is '18' which is
rightly taken by the tribunal. Thus, the petitioner is
entitled for compensation of Rs.3,02,400/- (Rs.7,000/- x
12 x 18 x 20%) on account of 'loss of future income'.
17. Towards pain and suffering, Rs.30,000/- is
awarded as against Rs.10,000/-.
18. Towards medical expenses, the Tribunal has
awarded Rs.98,723/- on the basis of medical bills and
documents produced by the petitioner. There is no reason
to interfere with the same.
19. Towards food and nourishment, attendant
charges and conveyance charges, the tribunal has not
awarded any amount. It is just and proper to award a sum
of Rs.10,000/- under this head.
20. Towards loss of income during laid up period,
attendant and transportation, the tribunal has awarded
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3396-DB
Rs.6,750/-. The petitioner would be entitled to
Rs.21,000/- and it is accordingly awarded.
21. The tribunal has not awarded any amount
towards loss of amenities. It is not in dispute that the
petitioner has taken treatment as inpatient for a period of
15 days. We are of the opinion that Rs.25,000/- would be
reasonable amount under this head.
22. Hence, the compensation is re-assessed under
different heads as under;
Sl. Heads By Tribunal By this Court
No.
1. Injury pain and Rs.10,000/- Rs.30,000/-
sufferings
2. Medical expenses Rs.98,723/- Rs.98,723/-
3. Loss of future earning Rs.1,08,000/- Rs.3,02,400/-
capacity
4. Food and nourishment Rs.10,000/- Rs.10,000/-
and attendant charges
5. Loss of income during Rs.6,750/- Rs.21,000/-
laid up period
6. Loss of amenities --- Rs.25,000/-
Total Rs.2,33,473/- Rs.4,87,123/-
23. The petitioner is entitled for a total
compensation of Rs.4,87,123/- as against Rs.2,33,473/-
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3396-DB
awarded by the tribunal. Hence, the petitioner is entitled
for an enhanced compensation of Rs.2,53,650/- with
interest @ 6% p.a.
24. Hence, we proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(a) The appeal is allowed in part.
(b) The impugned judgment and award passed by the
Tribunal is modified.
(c) The petitioner is entitled for a total compensation
of Rs.4,87,123/- as against Rs.2,33,473/-
awarded by the tribunal, along with interest at the
rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till
realization. The petitioner is entitled for an
enhanced compensation of Rs.2,53,650/- with
interest @ 6% p.a.
(d) The respondent No.2-Insurance Company is
directed to deposit the enhanced compensation
amount before the tribunal within a period of eight
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-K:3396-DB
weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of
this judgment.
(e) The rest of the order passed by the tribunal is not
disturbed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
MSR
CT;BN
