Karnataka High Court
Sri. Narasimha Murthy. S vs Sri. Govindaraju on 12 November, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:45917
MFA No. 189 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 189 OF 2021 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI. NARASIMHA MURTHY S.,
S/O. SUBBAIAH,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
R/AT JALI GRAMA,BASAVANAPURA,
KUNDANA HOBLI, DEVANAHALLI TALUK,
BENGALURU -562 110.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. LATUR SURESH M.,ADVOCATE (VC))
AND:
1. SRI. GOVINDARAJU,
S/O SRI MUKUNDAIAH,
NO.301, 6TH MAIN,
2ND CROSS ATTUR LAYOUT,
BENGALURU-560 064.
Digitally signed by 2. THE MANAGER,
AASEEFA PARVEEN THE HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE
Location: HIGH COMPANY LTD.,
COURT OF NO.25/1 BUILDING NO.2,
KARNATAKA
SHANKARANARAYANA,
BUILDING, M. G. ROAD,
BANGALORE-560 001.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.O. MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R2(ABSENT);
R1- NOTICE DISPENSED WITH, V/O. DATED 11.10.2022)
THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 26.11.2020 PASSED IN
MVC NO.6902/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ADDITIONAL
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:45917
MFA No. 189 of 2021
SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND ACMM, MEMBER, MACT,
BENGALURU, (SCCH-23), 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 DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.Suresh.M.Latur who appears through video
conference and represents the appellant. No
representation on respondents' side on call.
2. This appeal is preferred by the claimant in MVC
No.6902/2018 which stood pending before the Motor
Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru and was disposed of
through order dated 26.11.2020.
3. Sri.Suresh.M.Lathur arguing the matter
contends that the appellant sustained 3 grievous injuries
in a road traffic accident. As against the claim for
Rs.10,00,000/- in total, the Tribunal awarded a meager
sum of Rs.1,18,000/- as compensation. Learned counsel
states that though Pw.2 who assessed the disability gave
NC: 2024:KHC:45917
evidence to the effect that the disability in respect of
whole body is 8%, the Tribunal failed to adopt proper
procedure for calculating the compensation which the
appellant is entitled towards loss of future earnings and
awarded a global sum of Rs.50,000/- which is
unjustifiable. Learned counsel also submits that the
Tribunal did not award any amount towards medical
expenses. Learned counsel further states that the
compensation granted under all other heads is also grossly
low. Learned counsel ultimately seeks for enhancement of
compensation.
4. The impugned order discloses that the Tribunal
awarded a sum of Rs.1,18,000/- as compensation divided
under following heads:
Sl. Description Amount
No
1 Attendant charges, extra
nutritious food and Rs.10,000
conveyance charges
2 Pain and sufferings Rs.20,000
3 Loss of income during Rs.18,000
NC: 2024:KHC:45917
laid up period
4 Towards disability Rs.50,000
5 Loss of future amenities
Rs.20,000
and happiness
Total Rs.1,18,000
5. It is not in dispute that the appellant sustained
compound interphalyngeal joint dislocation of right great
toe, cut lacerated wound at medial aspect of right great
toe and degloving injury of right heel pad which are all
grievous in nature. Though the appellant contended that
he was working at 'Nexus Showroom' by the date of
accident and was earning Rs.14,990/- p.m., he failed to
establish either his occupation or his earnings by the date
of accident. In this regard the submission that is made by
Sri.Suresh.M.Lathur is that the accident occurred in the
year 2018 and for the relevant period, for settlement of
claims, the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is
taking the notional income as Rs.12,500/- p.m. and at
least the said figure should have been adopted by the
Tribunal. The submission thus made appears justifiable.
NC: 2024:KHC:45917
Therefore, this Court considers desirable to take the
notional income of the appellant as Rs.12,500/- p.m. by
the date of accident. The Tribunal has rightly observed
that the disability in respect of whole body is 8%. Thus
being the case, the Tribunal ought to have awarded
justifiable sum as compensation towards loss of future
earnings. However, it did not do so. The age of the
appellant admittedly was 27 years by the date of accident.
Therefore, the appropriate multiplier to be applied as per
the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Smt.
Sarla Verma and Others Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation
and Another reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104 is '17'.
6. Thus the compensation which the appellant is
entitled to under the head 'loss of future earnings on
account of permanent physical disability' is as under:
Notional monthly income Rs.12,500/-
Annual income Rs.1,50,000/-
On applying appropriate Rs.25,50,000/-
multiplier 17
NC: 2024:KHC:45917
Permanent physical disability in Rs.2,04,000/-
respect of whole body being
8%, loss of future earnings is
7. Though the appellant produced Ex.P9-medical
bills, as rightly observed by the Tribunal, he failed to prove
the genuineness of those bills. However, having
considered the nature of injuries sustained and the
treatment taken, this Court considers desirable to award a
sum of Rs.20,000/- under the head medical expenditure.
Also this Court is of the view that the appellant would not
have attended his normal pursuits at least for a period of 2
months. Thus loss of earnings during laid up period comes
to Rs.25,000/- (Rs.12,500X2). Considering the nature of
injuries sustained, the treatment taken and the disability,
this Court finally holds that the appellant is entitled to
compensation under following heads:
Sl. Description Amount
No
1 Compensation for pain and
Rs.40,000
suffering
2 Loss of future earnings Rs.2,04,000
NC: 2024:KHC:45917
3 Loss of income during laid
Rs.25,000
up period
4 Towards food, extra
nourishment, conveyance Rs.15,000
and attendant charges
5 Medical expenditure Rs.20,000
6 Loss of amenities Rs.20,000
Total Rs.3,24,000
8. The Tribunal through the impugned order
awarded a sum of Rs.1,18,000/- only as compensation.
However, in the light of the forgoing discussion, this Court
holds that the appellant is entitled to a sum of
Rs.3,24,000/- as compensation. Therefore, the appeal is
disposed of with the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is allowed in part.
(ii) The compensation that is granted by the
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Bengaluru through orders in MVC
No.6902/2018 dated 26.11.2020 is
enhanced from Rs.1,18,000/- to
Rs.3,24,000/-.
NC: 2024:KHC:45917
(iii) The enhanced sum shall carry interest at
the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of
petition till the date of deposit.
(iv) Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the
enhanced sum within a period of 8(eight)
weeks from the date of receipt of copy of
this order.
(v) On such deposit, the appellant is permitted
to withdraw the entire amount.
Sd/-
(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
NS
CT:TSM
