Karnataka High Court
Sri. Nagaraj vs Sri. Ananda Kumar on 4 November, 2024
Author: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
Bench: Hanchate Sanjeevkumar
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:44124
MFA No. 8467 of 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8467 OF 2013 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI. NAGARAJ
S/O BABANNA,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
R/AT ALAGANHALLI,
MULBAGAL TALUK -563 131
KOLAR DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT.KALPANA P V.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. ANANDA KUMAR
S/O VISHWANATHA SETTY,
MAJOR,
R/A VANIGANAHALLI,
UTHANUR POST,
MULBAGAL TALUK - 563 131
Digitally signed
KOLAR DISTRICT.
by RAMYA D
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
2. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD
KARNATAKA NO.50/4, ENVIRON TOWERS,
2ND FLOOR,
HOSUR MAIN ROAD,
ELECTRONIC CITY,
BENGALURU -100
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K VISHWANATHA.,ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
SRI.D.VIJAYAKUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R-2)
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV. ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 02.07.2013 PASSED IN
MVC.NO.187/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:44124
MFA No. 8467 of 2013
DISTRICT JUDGE & MACT, KOLAR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITON FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed under Section-173(1) of the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988 by the appellant-claimant challenging the
judgment and award dated 2nd July 2013, passed in MVC
No.187/2010, on the file of the II Additional District Judge &
MACT, Kolar (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal' for
brevity), seeking enhancement of compensation.
2. Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the
appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.2 - insurance
company and perused the materials on record.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that
the Tribunal erred in not awarding compensation towards loss
of future income, loss of amenties, loss of income during laid
up period and further quantum of compensation awarded
under other heads is on the lesser side. Therefore, seeks for
enhancement of compensation.
NC: 2024:KHC:44124
4. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for
the 2nd respondent - insurance company submits that the
Tribunal is justified in passing the impugned judgment and
award and there is no ground for enhancement and that the
compensation amount as awarded by the Tribunal is sufficient
and adequate.
5. The occurrence of accident, injuries sustained by the
claimant and coverage of insurance are not in dispute.
6. In the present case, from the medical evidence on
record, it is seen that the claimant suffered left and right side
spine fracture and also hip joints fracture and other injuries all
over his body.
7. The Tribunal has awarded compensation under various
heads as follows:
i) Pain & sufferings : Rs. 30,000-00
ii) Treatment, Medical Rs. 20,000-00
expenses
iii) Food, nourishment &
conveyance, attendant
charges : Rs. 5,000-00
.............................
Total : Rs. 55,000-00
NC: 2024:KHC:44124
8. The accident caused in the year 2010. In the absence
of proof of income, the income would be Rs.5500/- per month
as per the notional income chart as recognized by the
Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. The claimant was
aged 35 years as on the date of accident. Therefore, 40% of
monthly income is to be added towards future prospects as per
the judgment of this Court in the case of New India
Assurance Company Limited -vs- Abdul and others in MFA
No.103807/2016 c/w MFA Nos.103835/2016 & 103807/2018
decided on 27.5.2022 and also in Sidram Vs. Divisional
Manager, United India Insurance Company Limited
and another reported in (2023) 3 SCC 439. The doctor
has stated that the claimant has suffered 65% disability to the
particular limb, but he has not stated the disability to the whole
body. The Tribunal has erred in not awarding compensation
towards 'loss of future income'. Considering the age, avocation
and injuries sustained by the claimant, this Court deems it
appropriate to assess the functional disability at 21%. The
appropriate multiplier applicable is '16'. Therefore, the 'loss
of future income would be Rs.3,10,464/- [{Rs.5500 plus
Rs.2,200/ (40%)} x 12 x 16 x 21%].
NC: 2024:KHC:44124
9. The appellant - claimant is an agriculturist and
considering the injuries sustained by him, the compensation of
Rs.30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under the head of 'pain
and suffering' is inadequate and insufficient and same requires
to be enhanced. Accordingly, it is enhanced to Rs.50,000/-.
10. The Tribunal has not awarded compensation towards
'loss of earnings during laid up period'. The claimant was in-
patient for 12 days. Considering the magnitude of injuries
suffered by the claimant, atleast two months is required to
recuperate and get back to normal day to day activities.
In view of the above, Rs.11,000/- (Rs.5500 x 2) is
awarded under the head of 'loss of earning during laid up
period'.
11. The Tribunal has not awarded compensation towards
loss of amenities. This Court deems it appropriate to award
Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities.
12. The Tribunal awarded Rs.20,000/- towards
treatment, medical expenses and Rs.5,000/- towards food,
nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges. This
NC: 2024:KHC:44124
Court deems it appropriate to modify the same and award
Rs.1,500/- towards medical expenses on the basis of the
actual bills produced by the claimant and further Rs.15,000/-
towards food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges.
13. Therefore, appellant/claimant is entitled for
compensation under various heads as follows:
Sl. Head of compensation Amount of
No. compensation
awarded
1 Pain & sufferings Rs. 50,000-00
2 Loss of earnings during laid up Rs. 11,000-00
period
3 Medical expenses Rs. 1,500-00
4 Loss of future income Rs.3,10,464-00
5 Food, nourishment, conveyance Rs. 15,000-00
and attendant charges
6 Loss of amenities Rs. 30,000-00
Total Rs.4,17,964-00
14. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed in part.
ii) The appellant/claimant is entitled to total
compensation of Rs.4,17,964/- (Rupees four
lakhs seventeen thousand nine hundred and
sixty-four only) as against Rs.55,000/-
NC: 2024:KHC:44124
awarded by the Tribunal alongwith interest at
6% per annum from the date of petition till
deposit.
iii) The impugned judgment and award dated 2nd
July 2013 passed in MVC No.187/2010, on
the file of the II Additional District Judge &
MACT, Kolar, is modified to the above extent.
iv) The enhanced compensation shall be
deposited by the 2nd respondent/insurance
company with interest at 6% per annum,
within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt of copy of the judgment.
v) Draw award accordingly.
vi) Registry is directed to return the Trial Court
Records to the Tribunal, alongwith certified
copy of this judgment forthwith.
SD/-
(HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR)
JUDGE
GSS
