Karnataka High Court
Chandrakant vs Shri.Maruti on 31 May, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7270
MFA No. 103272 of 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH
DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF MAY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 103272 OF 2016 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
CHANDRAKANT SHANKAR HALAGEKAR,
AGE: 47 YEARS, OCC: MASON, (NOW NIL),
R/O. TOPINKATTI VILLAGE, TQ: KHANAPUR,
DIST: BELAGAVI. NOW RESIDING
AT SHIVAJI NAGAR, BELAGAVI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. NEEL P. PATEL, AND SRI. GOURI SHANKAR MOT, AND
SRI. B. C. JAGANUR, ADVOCATES)
AND:
1. SHRI. MARUTI YASHWANT HOSURKAR,
AGE: 52 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS,
R/O: AT: MALANKALE, POST: IDALHOND,
TQ: KHANAPUR, DIST: BELAGAVI.
Digitally
signed by 2. THE MANAGER,
MANJANNA E
Location: UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD,
HIGH COURT "SEETA SADAN", MARUTI GALLI,
OF
KARNATAKA BELAGAVI.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. S. S. KOLIWAD, ADV. FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & AWARD DATED 23.03.2016, PASSED IN
MVC.NO.2504/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE VIII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BELAGAVI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM
PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7270
MFA No. 103272 of 2016
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE
COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the claimant aggrieved by the
judgment and award dated 23.03.2016 passed in MVC
No.2504/2014 on the file of the VIII Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Belagavi (For Short, 'the Tribunal'),
whereby the Tribunal awarded a compensation of
Rs.9,17,000- to the claimant.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are
referred to as per their rank referred to in the claim
petition before the Tribunal.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the
claimant and learned counsel for respondent No.1 and
respondent No.2- Insurance Company. Perused the
judgment and award of the Tribunal.
4. This claim petition was filed under Section 166
of the Motor Vehicles Act, (for short, 'the M.V.Act') seeking
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7270
compensation on account of injuries sustained by the
injured in road traffic accident that took place on
4.11.2014 at about 10.00 a.m., when the claimant was
proceeding on his Hero Honda motorcycle (for short 'the
motorcycle') bearing registration No.KA 22/EJ-5451 from
Khanapur-Jamboti Cross towards Vidya Nagar, Khanapur
with moderate speed, at that time a truck bearing
registration No.MH-06/K-3444 came from Khanapur
towards Belagavi, with high speed in rash and negligent
manner and dashed to the motorcycle of the claimant. Due
to the said impact, the claimant sustained grievous injuries
and was shifted to Vijaya Ortho and Trauma Center,
Belagavi, for treatment. It is contended that due to the
injuries sustained in the accident, the claimant lost his
100% earning capacity and his right leg is amputated
above knee level. The claimant was aged about 45 years
as on the date of accident and was doing mason work and
was earning Rs.15,000/- per month, but the Tribunal has
not considered the income of the claimant and granted
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7270
reasonable compensation. Further, the Tribunal has not
granted fair compensation on other heads. Hence, he
prays for allowing the appeal.
5. Learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance
Company submits that the Tribunal considering the oral
evidence and exhibited documents has reasonably granted
the compensation. Thus, he prays for dismissal of the
appeal.
6. As there is no dispute with regard to the
injuries sustained by the claimant in the road traffic
accident that occurred on 04.11.2014 at about 10.00 a.m.,
due to rash and negligent driving of driver of truck bearing
registration No.MH-06/K-3444 and the liability of the
insurer of offending vehicle, the points that arise for Court
consideration in this appeal are:
"i) Whether the quantum of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal is just and
reasonable or does it call for any
interference?"
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7270
ii) Whether the quantum of negligence as
ordered by the Tribunal requires to be
modified or not?"
7. In order to substantiate this aspect, respondent
No.2-Insurance Company has not examined any witnesses
and not produced any documents in support of his
contentions. From perusal of the charge sheet, two
vehicles are involved. The Tribunal considering negligence
fastened liability on Insurance Company to 70% and 30%
contributory negligence is fastened on the claimant.
Perused the complaint, FIR, charge sheet and other
material available on record. If 75% liability is fastened on
the Insurance Company and 25% contributory negligence
is fastened on the claimant, then it would meet the ends of
justice. Hence, respondent No.2-Insurance Company is
liable to pay 75% of the compensation to the claimant.
8. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for
the parties and perusal of the judgment and award of the
Tribunal, I am of the view that the compensation awarded
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7270
by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable, it is on lower
side and hence, it is required to be enhanced.
9. As per Ex.P.6 Wound Certificate, Ex.P.9-
Discharge Summary, Ex.P.14-Disability Certificate, the
claimant has suffered crush injury on his right leg and his
right leg is amputated above knee level.
10. As per the opinion of the doctor, right leg of the
claimant is amputated and artificial limb is required for
claimant throughout his life. The injuries sustained and
treatment taken by the claimant is also supported by oral
evidence of claimant and doctor, who were examined as
PWs.1 and 2 respectively. PW.2-doctor-Dr.Annasaheb
Bapusaheb Patil, an Orthopedic Surgeon has assessed the
disability of claimant at 80% and the Tribunal has
considered the disability at 100%, which is reasonable one
and no interference, is called for in that regard by this
Court.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7270
11. As per Ex.P.3-Statement of claimant recorded
under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C, the age of claimant was
taken as 49 years as on the date of accident. The accident
is of the year 2014. The claimant has not furnished any
document to prove his income. On the absence of such
proof, a notional income at Rs.8.500/- is taken into
consideration as per the circular issued by High court Legal
Services Committee. Hence, the multiplier applicable
would be '13' as per the decision of Sarala Verma (Smt)
And Others Vs.Delhi Transport Corporation And
Another1. If the disability is assessed at 100% to whole
body, 'loss of future income due to disability' which comes
to Rs.13,26,000/- ( Rs.8,500/- x 12 x13 x 100%).
12. The Tribunal has not awarded any
compensation in respect of 'loss of future prospects'. If
notional incomes of claimant is taken at Rs.8,500/- x 25%
(2009) 6 SCC 121
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7270
which comes to Rs.2,125/-. If this amount is calculated
2,125 x 12 x13 x 100%, it comes to Rs.3,31,500/-.
13. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.75,000/- towards 'pain and suffering'. As per the
wound certificate, discharge summary and disability
certificate, the claimant has sustained crush injuries and
his right leg is amputated. Therefore, an additional a sum
of Rs.25,000/- is awarded under this head. Hence, the
claimant is entitled for compensation of Rs.1,00,000/-
under the head 'pain and suffering'.
14. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.75,000/- towards 'loss of amenities' which is
reasonable one and no interference is called for in that
regard by this Court.
15. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.1,30,000/- towards 'medical expenses' which is
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7270
reasonable one and hence, no interference is called for in
that regard by this Court.
16. Towards 'conveyance, diet and attendance
charges etc., the Tribunal has awarded a sum of
Rs.20,000/- which is not reasonable one. Hence, an
additional sum of Rs.10,000/- is awarded under this
head.
17. The Tribunal has not awarded any
compensation under the head 'loss of income during laid
up period'. Hence, a sum of Rs.25,500/- (Rs.8,500 x 3)
is awarded under this head during the laid up period for a
period of three months considering the entire injuries
sustained by the claimant and considering the income of
claimant at Rs.8,500/- per month.
18. The Tribunal has not awarded any
compensation under the head 'artificial limb'. As per the
evidence of PW.2-doctor, has clearly opined that the right
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7270
leg of claimant is amputated and he requires artificial limb.
Therefore, sum of Rs.1,00,000/- is awarded under the
head 'future medical expenses'.
19. Thus, the claimant is entitled for compensation
on the following heads;
Compensation awarded
Sl.
Description By the By this Court
No.
Tribunal
1 Towards loss of future income 10,08,000/- 13,26,000/-
2 Future Prospects 3,31,500/-
3 Towards pain and suffering
sustained in the accident. 75,000/- 1,00,000/-
4 Towards loss of future amenities 75,000/- 75,000/-
5 Towards medical expenses 1,30,000/- 1,30,000/-
6 Towards conveyance, diet and
attendance charges 20,000/- 30,000/-
7 Loss of income during laid up
period - 25,500/-
8 Artificial Limb - 1,00,000/-
Total 13,08,000/- 21,18,000/-
Rounded off total amount 13,10,000/- 21,18,000/-
Less: compensation awarded by the
Tribunal 13,10,000/-
Enhanced by this Court 8,08,000/-
Therefore, the claimant is entitled for compensation
of Rs.21,18,000/- as against the compensation of
Rs.13,10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, I
pass the following;
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7270
ORDER
i) Misc. first appeal is allowed in part.
ii) The judgment and award dated 23.03.2016
passed in MVC.No.2504/2014 by the VIII
Additional District and Sessions Judge,
Belagavi, is hereby modified to the extent
stated herein above.
iii) The claimant is entitled for compensation at
75% out of Rs.21,18,000/-
(Rs.21,18,000/- x 75% = Rs.15,88,500/-) as
against the compensation of Rs.13,10,000/-
(Rs.13,10,000 x 75% =Rs.9,82,500/-) awarded
by the Tribunal with interest at the rate of 6%
per annum on the enhanced compensation from
the date of the claim petition, till the date of its
realization. The claimant is entitled for
additional enhanced compensation of
Rs.6,06,000/- (Rs.15,88,500/- - 9,82,500/-).
iv) Respondent No.2-Insurance Company is
directed to deposit additional compensation
amount of Rs.6,06,000/- with interest at the
rate of 6% per annum within a period of eight
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC-D:7270
weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this
judgment.
v) Respondent No.2/Insurance Company first pay
the compensation amount to the claimant, with
liberty to recover the same from the respondent
No.1.
vi) On deposit of the entire amount, the same shall
be paid to the claimant on proper identification.
No order as to costs.
Sd/-
JUDGE
AC/ct-an
