Karnataka High Court
United India Insurance Co Ltd vs Ravichandra Shetty on 5 November, 2024
Author: N S Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N S Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:44308
MFA No. 3309 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 3463 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
MFA NO.3309 OF 2018 C/W
MFA NO.3463 OF 2018 (MV-I)
IN MFA No. 3309/2018
BETWEEN:
UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD
DIVISIONAL OFFICE : UDUPI
BOX NO.78, JEWELL PLAZA, 1ST FLOOR
MARUTHI VEETHIKA
REP. BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER
UDUPI - 576 101 ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. RAVISH BENNI, ADV.)
AND:
1. RAVICHANDRA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
Digitally signed S/O. NARASSIMHA SHETTY
by KIRAN
R/O. SUBRAMANYA NILAYA
KUMAR R
MOODU META, ULLOR -11 VILLAGE
Location: HIGH
COURT OF KUNDAPURA TALUK PIN - 11
KARNATAKA
2. SHRINIVASA SHETTIGAR
AGE MAJOR S/O. YELLU SHETTIGAR
R/O. SHTTIGAR INDUSTRIES
RANGANAKERE, HEREDI VILLAGE
UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT
PIN - 576 210 ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.K.PRASANNA SHETTY, ADV. FOR R1;
R2 IS SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:44308
MFA No. 3309 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 3463 of 2018
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30/12/2017,
PASSED IN MVC NO.216/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, ADDITIONAL MACT, KUNDAPURA,
AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.7,37,448/- ALONG WITH
INTEREST AT 6% PER ANNUM ON RS.7,37,448/- FROM THE
DATE OF ACCIDENT TILL REALIZATION.
IN MFA NO. 3463/2018
BETWEEN:
SRI RAVICHANDRA SHETTY
S/O. NARASSIMHA SHETTY
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
R/O. SUBRMANYA NILAYA
MOODUMATA, ULLOOR - 11 VILLAGE
KUNDAPURA TALUK ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. K PRASANNA SHETTY., ADV.)
AND:
1. SRI SHRINIVASA SHETTIGAR
S/O. YELLU SHETTIGAR
AGED MAJOR, R/O. SHETTIGAR
INDUSTRIES, RANGANKERE
HERADI VILLAGE, UDUPI TALUK
2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.
DIVISIONAL OFFICE: UDUPI, BOX NO.78
JEWELL PLAZA, 1ST FLOOR, MARUTHI VEETHIKA
UDUPI - 576 101
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.RAVISH BENNI, ADV. FOR R2;
VIDE ORDER DATED 13.01.2020,
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 30.12.2017
PASSED IN MVC NO.216/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE, KUNDAPURA AND MEMBER, ADDITIONAL MACT,
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:44308
MFA No. 3309 of 2018
C/W MFA No. 3463 of 2018
KUNDAPURA, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The claimants as well as the insurer are in appeal.
2. The insurer contends that the quantum of
compensation awarded is exorbitant, while the claimant
contends that the award of compensation is inadequate.
3. The occurrence of the accident is not in dispute and
the liability of insurance to pay the compensation is also
not in dispute.
4. The doctor who treated the claimant has stated that
as a result of the accident, the claimant was having 38%
permanent disability to his left upper limb. He has also
stated that the rotation of the limb is fully restricted, and
the claimant's ability to grip with his left hand has been
reduced by 30%. The Tribunal on the basis of this
NC: 2024:KHC:44308
evidence concluded that the claimant has suffered
permanent disability to the extent of 30%.
5. The insurer, however, contends that the disability
should be 1/3rd of the disability stated by the doctor to the
particular limb and, therefore, assessment at 30% was
incorrect.
6. The claimant on the other hand contends that he was
working as a cook and, as a result of the injuries, his
functional disability is much more than 30% and it
requires enhancement.
7. The insurer while cross-examining the claimant, in
fact, made a suggestion that the injury suffered by the
claimant did not affect the work of the claimant as a cook.
This, by itself, indicates that the insurer admitted that the
claimant was working as a cook. If there is complete
restriction of rotation of his arm and also loss in the grip
strength by 30%, obviously, the ability of the claimant to
discharge his work as a cook has been rendered
NC: 2024:KHC:44308
impossible. It is no doubt true that the claimant can
engage himself in other activities such as a supervisory
work, but the fact remains that the claimant's avocation as
a cook is all but over.
8. In that view of the matter, the assessment of
disability at 30% by the Tribunal cannot be found fault
with.
9. The Tribunal has assessed the income at Rs.7,000/-
per month since there was no proof of actual income. In
such cases, a sum of Rs.9,000/- as determined by the
KSLSA for the accident is of the year 2015 will have to be
adopted. Since the climant has suffered 30% disability,
future prospects of 40% will have to be added to the said
income. Consequently, towards the loss of future earning,
the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.7,71,120/-
(Rs.9,000/- + Rs.3,600/- (40%) = Rs.12,600/- X 12 X 17
X 30%).
NC: 2024:KHC:44308
10. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,29,648/-
towards medical expenses, which is based on documentary
evidence and is therefore affirmed. The Tribunal has taken
the laid up period as 6 months. Since the income is now
taken as Rs.9000/-, the claimant would be entitled for a
sum of Rs.54,000/- (Rs.9,000/- X 6). The Tribunal has
awarded a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering
and Rs.50,000/- towards loss of amenities. In my view,
having regard to the fact that the claimant was
hospitalized on three occasions and also had to visit the
hospital multiple times as an outpatient, it would be
appropriate to enhance sum to Rs.75,000/- towards pain
and sufferings.
11. Similarly, since the claimant has been assessed to
have a permanent disability of 30%, it would also be
appropriate to enhance the 'loss of amenities' to
Rs.75,000/-. The claimant was hospitalized, in all, for 37
days on three separate occasions. In that view of the
matter, it would be appropriate to award a sum of
NC: 2024:KHC:44308
Rs.40,000/- towards 'food, conveyance and attendant
charges' as against the Rs.30,000/- awarded by the
Tribunal. A sum of Rs.20,000/- awarded towards 'future
medical expenses', is just and proper, and the same is
affirmed. Consequently, in modification of the award of the
Tribunal, the claimant is entitled for the following sums:
As As awarded
awarded by this
Sl. Compensation
by the Court
No. under
Tribunal
different (Rs.)
Heads (Rs.)
Loss of future 4,28,400/- 7,71,120/-
1.
earnings
Hospital and 1,29,648/- 1,29,648/-
2.
medical expenses
Loss of income 29,400/- 54,000/-
3. during laid up
period
Pain and 50,000/- 75,000/-
4.
Suffering
5. Loss of amenities 50,000/- 75,000/-
Food & 30,000/- 40,000/-
6. nourishment
charges,
NC: 2024:KHC:44308
traveling,
attendant
charges, loss of
income during
hospitalization
7. Future medical 20,000/- 20,000/-
expenses
TOTAL 7,37,448/- 11,64,768/-
12. Accordingly, the claimant is held entitled for
compensation of Rs.11,64,768/- as against
Rs.7,37,448/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.
from the date of petition till its realisation.
13. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
amount of compensation awarded within two months from
the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
14. The appeal of the insurer is devoid of merit and the
same is dismissed whereas the appeal of the claimant is
allowed in part.
NC: 2024:KHC:44308
15. The amount in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to
the Tribunal for disbursement.
Sd/-
(N S SANJAY GOWDA)
JUDGE
GSR
