Karnataka High Court
Yallappa S/O Mahantappa Divatagi vs Muddasar S/O Hajinijam Momin on 30 May, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7196
MFA No. 103647 of 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF MAY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103647 OF 2015 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
YALLAPPA S/O. MAHANTAPPA DIVATAGI,
AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: NIL,
R/O. MUNAVALLI, NOW RESIDING AT YAKKERI VILLAGE,
TAL: SAUNDATTI, DIST: BELAGAVI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SMT. SHAILA BELLIKATTI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MUDDASAR S/O. HAJINIJAM MOMIN,
AGE: 40 YEARS, OCC: CARPENTAR,
R/O. HOUSE NO.278, MANGALAWAR PETH,
KARAD, DIST: SATARA, (MAHARASHTRA).
2. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMAPNY LIMITED
ISSUING OFFICE, 468/1, OPP. POPATBHAI
PETROL PUMP, SHANIVAR PETH NO.7, KARAD,
DIST: SATARA, MAHARASHTRA STATE,
THROUGH THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER,
THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE, 3933/B2, MUDALAGI BUILDING
Digitally signed
by MANJANNA CLUB ROAD, BELAGAVI, DIST:BELAGAVI.
E
Location: HIGH
COURT OF ...RESPONDENTS
KARNATAKA
(BY SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, ADV. FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF
M.V. ACT, PRAYING TO ALLOW THE APPEAL AND MODIFY THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD IN M.V.C NO.282/2010 DATED 06-01-2012
PASSED BY THE LEARNED THE ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND
ADDL. MACT SAUNDATTI UNDER ALL PERMISSIBLE HEADS.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7196
MFA No. 103647 of 2015
JUDGMENT
Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the
consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the
matter is taken up for final disposal.
2. This appeal is filed by the claimant seeking
enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per their rank referred to in the claim petition
before the Tribunal.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
claimant and learned counsel for the respondent - Insurance
Company. Perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.
5. As there is no dispute regarding the injuries
sustained by the claimant in a road traffic accident that took
place on 14.08.2009, when the claimant was returning towards
his farm house on his TVS motor vehicle bearing registered
No.KA-24/J-6597 in a moderate speed on Munavalli - Naragund
road at about 09:30 p.m. At that time, the driver of the Tata
Truck bearing registered No.MH-11/M-6078 came in a rash and
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7196
negligent manner and dashed to the motorcycle of the
claimant. Due to the said impact, claimant sustained several
injuries including grievous injury. Hence, he was shifted to SDM
Medical Hospital, Dharwad for treatment and he had incurred
huge medical expenses. The Doctor noticed fracture and other
simple injuries. The Tribunal considering the evidence at Exs.P1
to P75 and considering the evidence of PW1, granted
compensation of Rs.1,20,000/-.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
Tribunal has failed to consider the injury sustained by the
claimant and the amount that was spent towards treatment.
The injury sustained by the claimant is grievous and simple
injuries, but the Tribunal has not granted reasonable
compensation under the head pain and sufferings. Further, the
Tribunal has not granted fair and reasonable compensation
under the head loss of income during laid up period, towards
food, conveyance, diet and incidental charges. Hence, she
prayed to allow the appeal.
7. Learned counsel for the respondent - Insurance
Company submits that the Tribunal considering the medical
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7196
evidence Ex.P4 - wound certificate as well as oral evidence of
PW1 has granted reasonable compensation. Hence, no
interference is called for in that regard. Thus, she prayed to
dismiss the appeal.
8. As there is no dispute regarding the injuries
sustained by the claimant in the road traffic accident that
occurred on 14.08.2009, due to rash and negligent driving by
the driver of the Tata Truck bearing registered No.MH-11/M-
6078 and liability of the insurer of the offending vehicle, the
only point that arise for Court's consideration in this appeal is,
"Whether the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper or does
it call for any interference for enhancement?"
9. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the
parties and perusing the judgment and award of the Tribunal, I
am of the opinion that the compensation awarded by the
Tribunal is just and reasonable, it is on the lower side and
hence, it is required to be enhanced.
10. The claimant has sustained in all six injuries and as
per the opinion of the Doctor, injury No.6 is grievous in nature
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7196
and injury Nos.1 to 5 are simple in nature. The claimant was
treated at SDM Medical Hospital, Dharwad, wherein he was
treated as in-patient from 14.08.2009 till 26.08.2009 as
inpatient i.e., for a period of 12 days. The injuries sustained
and the treatment taken by the claimant is also supported by
oral evidence of claimant and Ex.P4 - wound certificate. In this
case, the Tribunal has observed that the claimant sustained a
grievous injury and five simple injuries. For one grievous injury,
as per settled law, the claimant is entitled for an amount of
Rs.40,000/- and for simple injury, the claimant is entitled for
Rs.5,000/- each i.e., Rs.25,000/-. Therefore, the claimant is
entitled for Rs.65,000/- under the head "pain and
sufferings", as against Rs.50,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
11. "Towards loss of income during laid up
period", the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.5,000/- taking the
notional income of the claimant. The nature of injuries
suggested that, the claimant must have been under treatment
for a period of three months and therefore, a sum of
Rs.15,000/- (Rs.5,000/- X 3) is awarded under the said head,
as against Rs.5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7196
12. The Tribunal has awarded a um of Rs.30,000/-
towards "medical expenses" which is reasonable amount and
no interference is called for by this Court in that regard.
13. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards
"loss of amenities", which is reasonable one. Hence no
interference is called for in that regard.
14. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards
"food, conveyance and other incidental charges", which is
not reasonable one. Hence, additional amount of Rs.15,000/- is
granted under the said head.
15. Thus, the claimants are entitled for the following
compensation:
Pain and sufferings Rs.65,000/-
Medical expenses Rs.30,000/-
Loss of amenities Rs.25,000/-
Loss of income during laid up period Rs.15,000/-
Food, conveyance and other incidental Rs.25,000/-
charges
Total Rs.1,60,000/-
Less: Compensation awarded by Tribunal Rs.1,20,000/-
Balance Rs.40,000/-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7196
16. The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of
Rs.1,60,000/-, as against Rs.1,20,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal. Accordingly, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and
award dated 06.01.2012 passed by the Addl. Senior Civil Judge
and Addl. MACT, Saundatti is modified to the extent stated
hereinabove.
(ii) The claimant is entitled for an additional
compensation of Rs.40,000/- with interest at 6% per annum
from the date of petition till the date of its realization. However,
the claimant is not entitled for interest for the delayed period of
1338 days in filing the appeal.
(iii) Respondent No.2 - Insurance Company shall
deposit enhanced compensation together with interest at 6%
per annum within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt
of copy of this judgment.
(iv) Draw modified award accordingly.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7196
(v) Registry to transmit the copy of this judgment to
the concerned Tribunal alongwith its records.
No order as to costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE
RSH/ct-an
