Karnataka High Court
Chandra G vs M/S Icici Lambord Gen Insurance Co Ltd on 12 November, 2024
Author: N S Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N S Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:45841
MFA No. 45 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 45 OF 2018 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
1. CHANDRA G
S/O LATE CHANNAPPA G,
AGED 38 YEARS,
R/AT NO.125/1, THIMMAIAH REDDY BUILDING,
MUNESHWARA LAYOUT,
DODDATHOGURU,
BENGALURU-560100
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. THIPPESWAMY.B.C., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. M/S ICICI LAMBORD GEN INSURANCE CO LTD
NO.89, 2ND FLOOR, SVT COMPLEX,
MADIWALA, HOSUR MAIN ROAD,
BENGALURU-560068
Digitally signed REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.
by KIRAN
KUMAR R 2. LAKSHMIKANTH MAKARAJU
Location: HIGH S/O MAKARAJU SATHYANARAYANA RAJU,
COURT OF MAJOR,
KARNATAKA FLAT NO.TO 2, SAI BALAJI SUNRISE,
GREEN HOUSE LAYOUT, DODDATHOGURU VILLAGE,
ELECTRONIC CITY PHASE-I,
NEAR NARASIMHASWAMY TEMPLE,
BENGALURU-560103
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. KRISHNA KISHORE S., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
VIDE ORDER DATED:07.02.2023, NOTICE TO R-2 IS
DISPENSED WITH)
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:45841
MFA No. 45 of 2018
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:26.10.2017
PASSED IN MVC NO.887/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI
ADDITIONAL SCJ & XIX ACMM MEBMER-MACT, BENGLAURU.
C/C OF II ADDITIONAL JUDGE AND XXVII ACMM. PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND
SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, 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 claimant, being aggrieved by the attribution of
negligence to the extent of 20% on him and also seeking
enhancement of compensation, is in appeal.
2. The occurrence of the accident and the liability to pay
compensation are not in dispute.
3. The Tribunal has come to the conclusion that the claimant
had also contributed to the occurrence of the accident to
the extent of 20% since he was crossing the road at a
place where there was no zebra-crossing. In my view,
this reasoning of the Tribunal would be incorrect since the
mere crossing of a road at a place which had been
NC: 2024:KHC:45841
earmarked for crossing would not entitle the driver of the
motorcycle to cause an accident. It is also noticed that
the charge sheet was laid against the rider of the
offending vehicle and consequently, the attribution of
negligence on the claimant would therefore be incorrect.
In that view of the matter, the insurer is held liable to pay
entire compensation.
4. As far as compensation is concerned, the Tribunal has
assessed the disability at 10% to the whole body. Having
regard to the fact that the claimant had suffered fracture
of both bones of his right leg, it would be appropriate to
assess the disability at 15% to the whole body.
5. The Tribunal has assessed the notional income at
Rs.7,000/- since there was no actual proof of income. In
such circumstances, it would be appropriate to adopt the
notional income determined by the Karnataka State Legal
Services Authority, which, for the accident of the year
2015, would be Rs.9,000/-. Consequently, the claimant
would be entitled to Rs.2,43,000/- (Rs.9,000/- X 12 X 15
X 15%) towards loss of future earnings.
NC: 2024:KHC:45841
6. Since the claimant suffered fracture of both bones of his
right leg and the Tribunal has not awarded any sums
towards loss of amenities, it would be appropriate to
award a sum of Rs.50,000/- as against Rs.40,000/-
towards pain and suffering and Rs.40,000/- towards loss
of amenities.
7. As the claimant suffered 15% disability, it would be
appropriate to treat the laid up period as 3 months and
consequently, the claimant would be entitled to
Rs.27,000/- (Rs.9,000 X 3 months) towards loss of
income during laid up period.
8. Since the claimant was hospitalized for about 9 days, it
would be appropriate to award a sum of Rs.20,000/- as
against Rs.15,000/- towards conveyance, nourishment
and nutritious food.
9. The amount of Rs.75,000/- awarded towards medical
expenses, being based on documentary evidence, is
affirmed.
10. Consequently, the award of the Tribunal is modified
and the following sums are awarded as
compensation:
NC: 2024:KHC:45841
As As
Compensation awarded awarded
Sl.
under different by the by this
No.
Heads Tribunal Court
(Rs.) (Rs.)
1. Pain and sufferings 40,000 50,000
Loss of future 1,26,000 2,43,000
2.
earnings
3. Medical expenses 75,000 75,000
Loss of income Nil 27,000
4. during the laid up
period
Conveyance, 15,000 20,000
5. nourishment and
nutritious food
Loss of amenities in Nil 40,000
6.
life
Total 2,56,000 4,55,000
11. Accordingly, the claimant is held entitled for
compensation of Rs.4,55,000/- as against
Rs.2,56,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6%
p.a. from the date of petition till its realisation.
12. The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the
entire amount of compensation awarded within two
months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of
this judgment.
NC: 2024:KHC:45841
13. On such deposit being made by the insurer, the
claimant would be entitled to withdraw the same.
14. The appeal is accordingly allowed in part.
Sd/-
(N S SANJAY GOWDA)
JUDGE
PKS
