Karnataka High Court
Sri Sathyappa vs Bharathi Axa General Insurance Co. Ltd on 6 November, 2024
Author: N S Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N S Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:44833
MFA No. 8159 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 2150 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 8159 OF 2022 (MV-I)
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2150 OF 2020 (MV-I)
IN MFA No. 8159/2022
BETWEEN:
SRI. JUNJAIAH M P
S/O PUTTAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
R/AT NO.22,
MUNINAGARA,
THATTAGUPPE,
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK,
BENGALURU-560082.
...APPELLANT
Digitally signed (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR., ADVOCATE)
by KIRAN KUMAR
R AND:
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA 1. BHARTI AXA GENERAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
NO.28, 1ST FLOOR,
FERNS ICON,
SURVEY NO.28,
DODDANAKUNDI VILLAGE,
K R PURAM HOBLI,
BENGALURU-560037.
REP. BY THE MANAGER.
2. SRI SATHYAPPA
S/O LATE CHIKKANNA,
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:44833
MFA No. 8159 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 2150 of 2020
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
R/AT MUNINAGARA, THATTAGUPPE POST,
HAROHALLI HOBLI,
KANAKAPURA TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. B.PRADEEP, ADV. FOR R1,
SRI. GIRIMALLAIAH, ADV. FOR R2.)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.09.2019 PASSED IN MVC
NO. 1474/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE X ADDITIONAL JUDGE,
COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS
TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU (SCCH-16), AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS. 1,84,500/- WITH INTEREST AT 9
PERCENT P.A. (EXCLUDING FUTURE MEDICAL EXPENSES OF
RS. 20,000/-) FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL
REALIZATION.
IN MFA NO. 2150/2020
BETWEEN:
SRI SATHYAPPA
S/O LATE CHIKKANNA
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
RESIDING AT: MUNINAGARA
THATTAKUPPE POST,
HAROHALLI HOBLI,
KANAKAPURA TALUK,
RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562117
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GIRIMALLAIAH., ADVOCATE)
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:44833
MFA No. 8159 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 2150 of 2020
AND:
1. BHARTHI AXA GENERAL
INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
NO.28, 1ST FLOOR, FERNS ICON,
SURVY NO.28,
DODDANAKUNDI VILLAGE,
K R PURAM HOBLI
BANGALORE-560 001.
2. SRI JUNJAIAH M P
S/O PUTTAIAH
MAJOR
NO.22 MUNINAGARA,
THATTAGUPPE,
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK,
BANGALORE -560 082.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. PRADEEP B., ADV. FOR R1,
SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR & SRI. NAGESH M., ADVS. FOR R2.)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED. 16.09.2019, PASSED IN MVC
NO.1474/2017, ON THE FILE OF THE X-ADDITIONAL JUDGE,
COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU (SCCH-16), PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:44833
MFA No. 8159 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 2150 of 2020
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The owner of the offending vehicle as well as the
claimant are in appeal.
2. The Tribunal has recorded a finding that the accident
did take place and the claimant did suffer injuries and has
proceeded to award a sum of Rs.1,84,500/-.
3. The Tribunal has further recorded a finding that the
vehicle was being ridden by one Nagesh and not by Ravi
Kiran as stated by the claimant, and in order to come to
this conclusion, it has placed reliance on the deposition of
PW.3 during the course of his cross-examination.
4. It is to be noticed here that the claimant who had
suffered injuries was clear in his statement that Ravi Kiran
was riding the motorcycle. The police who investigated the
complaint have also come to the conclusion that Ravi Kiran
was driving the motorcycle.
5. The insurer, however, contends that its investigator
had conducted a parallel investigation and had secured an
NC: 2024:KHC:44833
audio recording in which there was an admission that
Nagesh was riding the motorcycle. It is to be stated here
that in the affidavit filed by the investigator, it is not even
stated as to who was a person from whom an audio
recording was secured. The investigator who was cross-
examined also admits that the rider of the vehicle did have
a driving licence. However, in the very next breath, he
says Nagesh was not riding the motorcycle. There is thus
an obvious contradiction in the evidence of investigator. If
the statement of the investigator that the driver of the
motorcycle was having a driving licence is taken into
consideration, the liability of the insurer would stand
automatically attracted.
6. As already observed, in this case, the police have laid
a charge sheet that Ravi Kiran was riding the motorcycle.
In this view of the matter, in my view, the Tribunal could
not have taken the admission by PW.3 that Nagesh, owner
of the motorcycle was riding the motorcycle. Accordingly,
the finding of the Tribunal in this regard is set aside and as
NC: 2024:KHC:44833
a consequence, the insurer would be liable to pay
compensation. The appeal of the owner of the offending
vehicle is accordingly allowed. The amount deposited by
the owner shall be refunded to the owner.
7. As far as quantum of compensation is concerned, the
Tribunal has come to the conclusion that the claimant had
suffered fracture to his right femur and has assessed the
disability at 10% to the whole body. The said assessment,
in my view, is correct.
8. The Tribunal has taken into consideration that the
claimant had secured a BPL card and therefore assessed
the monthly income at Rs.3,000/- In my view, this
assessment would be incorrect. In light of the
determination of notional income by the Karnataka State
Legal Services Authority for the accident of the year 2017,
the notional income would be Rs.11,000/-. Consequently,
the claimant would be entitled to Rs.1,71,600/-
(Rs.11,000/- X 12 X 13 X 10%) towards loss of earning
capacity.
NC: 2024:KHC:44833
9. Since the claimant suffered fracture of right femur, it
would be appropriate to treat the laid up period as four
months and since the notional income is now assessed at
Rs.11,000/-, the claimant would be entitled to Rs.44,000/-
(Rs.11,000 X 4 months) towards loss of income during laid
up period.
10. The amounts awarded towards pain and sufferings,
loss of amenities, food, nourishment, conveyances,
medical expenses and future medical expenses, in my
view, are just and proper.
11. Consequently, the award of the Tribunal is modified
and the following sums are awarded as compensation:
As As
awarded awarded
Sl. Compensation
by the by this
No. under different
Tribunal Court
Heads
(Rs.) (Rs.)
1. Pain and sufferings 40,000 40,000
Loss of future 46,800 1,71,600
2.
earnings
NC: 2024:KHC:44833
3. Medical expenses 25,657 25,657
Loss of income 9,000 44,000
4. during the laid up
period
Conveyance, 13,000 13,000
5. nourishment and
nutritious food
Loss of amenities 30,000 30,000
6.
in life
Future medical 20,000 20,000
7.
expenses
Total 1,84,457 3,44,257/-
12. Accordingly, the claimant is held entitled for
compensation of Rs.3,44,257/- as against Rs.1,84,457/-
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:44833
14. On the deposit being made by the insurer, the
claimant is entitled to withdraw the same.
15. The appeal of the claimant is accordingly allowed in
part.
Sd/-
(N S SANJAY GOWDA)
JUDGE
PKS
