Karnataka High Court
The Manager vs Shivu @ Shivaraj on 13 November, 2024
Author: N S Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N S Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
MFA No. 3682 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019
MFA No. 5587 of 2019
AND 2 OTHERS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3682 OF 2022
C/W
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5586 OF 2019,
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 5587 OF 2019,
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1904 OF 2020,
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1908 OF 2020
(MV-I)
IN MFA No. 3682/2022:
BETWEEN:
1. CHOLAMANDALAM MS GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
6TH FLOOR, GOLDEN HEIGHTS BUILDING,
Digitally signed 59TH MAIN CROSS, RAJAJINAGARA,
by KIRAN 2ND BLOCK, BENGALURU-560 010,
KUMAR R
Location: HIGH
BY ITS DEPUTY MANAGER.
COURT OF ...APPELLANT
KARNATAKA
(BY SRI. H.S.LINGARAJ., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. RAVI
NOW AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
S/O. MANJEGOWDA,
R/AT MUTTANAHALLI VILLAGE,
MADDUR TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT.
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
MFA No. 3682 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019
MFA No. 5587 of 2019
AND 2 OTHERS
2. A. B. SHIVAKUMAR
NOW AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS,
S/O. BASAPPA,
R/O. ARAHATHOLALU VILLAGE,
BHADRAVATHI TALUK,
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH.R., PATEL., ADVOCATE FOR R-2;
R-1 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.10.2021
PASSED IN MVC NO. 924/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE
ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MADDUR,
MANDYA DISTRICT, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF
RS.1,39,963/- WITH INTEREST AT 6 PERCENT P.A. FROM THE
DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT WITH THE
TRIBUNAL.
IN MFA NO. 5586/2019:
BETWEEN:
1. THE MANAGER
CHOLAMANDLAM GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
GOLDEN HEIGHTS BUILDING
6TH FLOOR, NO.1/2, 59TH MAIN
CROSS, RAJAJINAGARA,
2ND BLOCK, BENGALURU 560010
BY ITS MANAGER
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. O MAHESH., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MANJAPPA R @ MANJUNATH
S/O RAJAPPA R, AGE 28 YEARS.,
R/O KENCHANADODDI VILLAGE
MALAVALLI TALUK, MANDYA DIST-577501.
-3-
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
MFA No. 3682 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019
MFA No. 5587 of 2019
AND 2 OTHERS
2. A B SHIVAKUMAR
S/O BASAPPA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/O ARAHATHOLALU
VILLAGE, BHADRAVATHI TALUK,
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577201
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. N.R.RANGEGOWDA., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
SRI. CHANDRAKANTH.R. PATEL., ADVOCATE FOR R-2)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11/03/2019,
PASSED IN MVC NO.923/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MALAVALLI, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.11,17,500/- WITH INTEREST AT THE
RATE OF 9% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL
REALIZATION. THE FUTURE MEDICAL EXPENSES OF
RS.60,000/- SHALL NOT CARRY ANY INTEREST.
IN MFA NO. 5587/2019:
BETWEEN:
1. THE MANAGER
CHOLAMANDLAM GENERAL
INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
GOLDEN HEIGHTS BUILDING
6TH FLOOR, NO.1/2, 59TH MAIN
CROSS, RAJAJINAGAR 2ND BLOCK
BENGALURU-560010
BY ITS MANAGER
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. O MAHESH.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SHIVU @ SHIVARAJ
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS., MADDAPPA
-4-
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
MFA No. 3682 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019
MFA No. 5587 of 2019
AND 2 OTHERS
R/O KENCHANADODDI VILLAGE
MALAVALLI TALUK , MANDYA DIST.
PREMANENAT RESIDING AT
KESHAVAPURA VILLAGE
AMRUTHAPURA HOBLI, HOLALAKERE
TALUK, CHITRA DURGA DISTRICT-577501.
2. A B SHIVAKUMAR
AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
S/O BASAPPA
R/O ARAHATHOLALU
VILLAGE, BHADRAVATHI TALUK
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577201
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. N.R.RANGEGOWDA., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
R-2 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11/03/2019,
PASSED IN MVC NO.925/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MALAVALLI, AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.1,64,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE
RATE OF 9% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL
REALIZATION.
IN MFA NO. 1904/2020:
BETWEEN:
1. MANJAPPA R ALIAS MANJUNATH
S/O RAJAPPA R
NOW AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
R/O KENCHANADODDI VILLAGE
MALAVALLI TALUK,
MANDYA DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT
-5-
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
MFA No. 3682 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019
MFA No. 5587 of 2019
AND 2 OTHERS
(BY SRI. N.R.RANGEGOWDA., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. A B SHIVAKUMAR
S/O BASAPPA
NOW AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/O ARAHATHOLALU VILLAGE
BHADRAVATHI TALUK
SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577301.
2. THE MANAGER
CHOLAMANDALAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.
GOLDEN HEIGHTS BUILDING
6TH FLOOR, NO.1/2, 59TH MAIN CROSS
RAJAJINAGARA, 2ND BLOCK
BANGALORE-560 010.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R. PATEL., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
SRI. O.MAHESH., ADVOCATE FOR R-2)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11.03.2019
PASSED IN MVC NO.923/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MALAVALLI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA NO. 1908/2020:
BETWEEN:
1. SHIVU ALIAS SHIVARAJ
S/O MADAPPA
NOW AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
R/O KENCHANADODDI VILLAGE
B G PURA HOBLI, MALAVALLI TALUK
MANDYA DISTRICT-571 401.
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
MFA No. 3682 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019
MFA No. 5587 of 2019
AND 2 OTHERS
PERMANENT R/O KESHAVAPURA VILLAGE
AMRUTHAPURA HOBLI
HOLALAKERE TALUK
CHITRADURGA DISTRICT
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. N.R.RANGEGOWDA., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. A B SHIVAKUMAR
S/O BASAPPA
NOW AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
R/O ARAHATHOLALU VILLAGE
BHADRAVATHI TALUK
SHIVAMODDA DISTRICT-577 201.
2. THE MANAGER
CHOLAMANDALAM GENERAL INSURANCE CO.LTD.
GOLDEN HEIGHTS BUILDING
6TH FLOOR, NO.1/2
59TH MAIN CROSS
RAJAJINAGARA, 2ND BLOCK
BANGALORE-560 010
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. CHANDRAKANTH R. PATEL., ADVOCATE FOR R-1;
SRI.O.MAHESH., ADVOCATE FOR R-2)
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT,
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:11.03.2019
PASSED IN MVC NO.925/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MALAVALLI, 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:
-7-
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
MFA No. 3682 of 2022
C/W MFA No. 5586 of 2019
MFA No. 5587 of 2019
AND 2 OTHERS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. These appeals arise out of the awards passed by the
Tribunal, as detailed below:
Sl. MFA Arising out of awards
Appellant
No. No. in MVC no.
Award dated 16.10.2021
passed in MVC No.924 of
2016 on the file of the
Cholamandalam
3682 Additional Senior Civil
MS General
1 of Judge and MACT,
Insurance
2022 Maddur, Mandya
Company Limited
District, awarding
compensation of
Rs.1,39,963/- to Ravi.
Manjappa R alias Award dated 11.03.2019
2 of passed in MVC
Manjunath
2020 No.923/2016 on the file
of the Senior Civil Judge
Cholamandalam
5586 and MACT, Malavalli,
MS General
3 of awarding compensation
Insurance
2019 of Rs.11,17,500/-.
Company Limited
1908 Award dated 11.03.2019
Shivu alias
4 of passed in MVC
Shivaraj
2020 No.925/2016 on the file
of the Senior Civil Judge
Cholamandalam
5587 and MACT, Malavalli,
MS General
5 of awarding compensation
Insurance
2019 of Rs.1,64,000/-.
Company Limited
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
BRIEF FACTS:
2. According to the claimants, on 14.01.2015 at about
12.30 p.m., an accident occurred between a motor-
bike and a canter lorry, and as a result of the collision,
the rider as well as the pillion riders suffered injuries.
3. Manjappa the rider of the motor cycle filed MVC No.923
of 2016 while Shivu @ Shivaraju--the pillion rider filed
MVC No.925 of 2016 before the Senior Civil Judge and
JMFC, Malavalli. The other pillion rider Ravi filed the
claim petition in MVC No.924 of 2016 before the
Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Maddur.
4. The Tribunal after assessing the evidence adduced
before it has recorded a finding that the accident
occurred on 14.01.2015, in which the claimants had
suffered injuries and that they were entitled to a
compensation of Rs.11,17,500/-, Rs.1,64,000/- and
Rs.1,39,963/- along with interest at 9% per annum.
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
5. The Tribunal also recorded a finding that the insurer
had in fact received the premium by way of a cheque
on 14.01.2015 and therefore, it was liable to pay the
compensation.
6. The insurer is therefore in appeal, basically, contending
that the policy it had issued was valid only from
19.01.2015 and since the accident occurred on
14.01.2015, it did not have the liability to satisfy the
compensation. It is argued that the proposal itself was
submitted on 19.01.2015 and therefore, there was no
question of the insurance company being liable. An
argument is also advanced that the claimants were
themselves negligent inasmuch as the motor-cycle in
which they were riding had two pillion riders, which
itself indicated that the negligence on their part.
7. The claimants are also in appeal seeking for
enhancement. They also supported the judgment of
the Tribunal and contend that the proposal as well as
- 10 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
the certificate of insurance itself records the fact that
the premium was received on 14.01.2015 by means of
a cheque and therefore, the risk continues from
14.01.2015 itself. It is their contention that the
issuance of a policy subsequently could have no
bearing on the liability and places reliance on the
Division Bench judgment of this Court rendered in the
case of Smt.Edna Lemuel Maben1 which has followed
the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case
of Dharam Chand2.
8. The certificate of insurance which is produced by the
learned counsel for the insurer indicates that the
receipt bearing No.1004128858 was issued on
14.01.2015 for having received a cheque for a sum of
Rs.25,689/-. It is not in dispute that this cheque was
submitted by the owner of the insured vehicle.
The Claim Manager, Cholamandalam MS General Insurance Company Limited, Bangalore vs.
Smt.Edna Lemuel Maben, ILR 2020 Kar 22.
. Oriental Insurance Company limited vs. Dharam Chand, 2010 ACJ 2659: 2020 (2) SCC 68
- 11 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
However, the period of insurance mentioned in the
certificate of insurance states that it was valid from
19.01.2015 00:01 hours till midnight on 18.01.2016.
9. As the accident has occurred on 14.01.2015, a
question has arisen as to whether the risk would
commence from 14.01.2015 or 19.01.2015.
10. Shri O.Mahesh and H.S.Lingaraju, learned counsel,
contend that no matter when the premium was
received, it is the date on which the contract of
insurance comes into force which would be the relevant
date and, in this case, the insurance policy was issued
on 19.01.2015 and hence, the risk cover starts from
that date.
11. It is also sought to be contended that as per
Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority
(Manner of Receipt of Premium) Regulations,
2002, the risk commences, according to Regulation
- 12 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
(4)3, only after the receipt of the premium. Since the
premium was actually received on the date the cheque
was encashed, the risk would only commence from that
date.
12. A Division bench of this Court, by placing reliance on
the judgement of the Apex Court in Dharam Chand,
has stated as follows:
"16. .............. Under such circumstance,
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
DHARAM CHAND (Supra) has held that
the insurance company cannot disown its
liability, that, as and when the cheque or
cash is received, the risk is deemed to
have commenced from that time. ........."
13. In light of the said declaration of law by the Division
Bench, the insurance company cannot disown its
4. Commencement of Risk: In all cases of risks covered by the policies issued by an insurer,
the attachment of risk to an insurer will be in consonance with the terms of Section 64VB of the
Act and except in the cases where the premium has been paid in cash, in all other cases the
insurer shall be on risk only after the receipt of the premium by the insurer.
Provided that in the case of a policy of general insurance that where the remittance made by the
proposer or the policyholder is not realised by the insurer, the policy shall be treated as void ab-
initio.
Provided further that in the case of policy of life insurance, the continuance of the risk or
otherwise shall depend on the terms and conditions of the policy already entered into.
- 13 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
liability and its liability would commence from the time
it receives the cheque or the cash.
14. The reliance placed on Regulation (4) would also not
come to the aid of the insurer. Regulation (3)4 of the
said Regulations, in fact, indicates the manner of
premium payments and one of the accepted modes of
payment of premium is by way of cheque under
Regulation (3)(b). Regulation (4) indicates the
commencement of risk and it says that the insurer
should cover the risk after the receipt of premium by
the insurer, except in cases where the premium has
been received in cash.
3. Manner of premium payments: The premium to be paid by any person proposing to take an
insurance policy (hereinafter referred to as the proposer) or by the policyholder to an insurer may
be made in any one or more of the following manner(s), namely:- a) Cash;
b) Any recognized banking negotiable instrument such as cheques, including demand
drafts, pay orders, banker's cheques drawn on any scheduled bank in India;
c) Postal money orders; d) Credit or Debit Cards held in his name;
e) Bank Guarantee or Cash Deposit; f) Internet; g) E-transfer;
h) Direct credits via standing instructions of proposer or the policyholder or the life insured
through bank transfers; and
i) any other method of payment as may be approved by the Authority from time to time.
- 14 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
15. If the premium can be paid by way of cheque under
Regulation (3)(b), it is obvious that the moment the
cheque is received by the insurer, there is a receipt of
the premium and Regulation (4) would come into
operation.
16. If it was the intent of IRDAI that the commencement of
risk would be on the encashment of the cheque, having
regard to the language used in Regulation (3)
regarding receipt of premium by way of cheque,
Regulation (4) would have read that the risk would
commence only from the date of encashment of the
cheque.
17. Since Regulation (4) categorically states that on
receipt of the premium, which can also be by means
of acceptance of cheque, the risk would commence
from the time the cheque was received by the insurer.
18. In this case, since the Receipt of the insurer indicated
that it had received a cheque on 14.01.2015, it is
- 15 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
obvious that the risk would commence from
14.01.2015 itself which, incidentally, was the day on
which the accident occurred. It cannot therefore be no
doubt that the liability of the insurer would commence
from the date on 14.01.2015.
19. It may also have to be stated here that if it was the
case of the insurer that it had received the proposal
and consequently, the cheque only on 19.01.2015,
nothing prevented the insurer to examine the
Intermediary who had issued the proposal and whose
name is mentioned as 'Purushotham' with the
Intermediary Code 54516 to establish the fact that the
proposal itself was received after the occurrence of the
accident. Further, in this proposal, the proposed period
of insurance is clearly mentioned as 14.01.2015 to
13.01.2016.
20. The insurer could have also produced the receipt book
of 14.01.2015 to indicate that it had not received the
- 16 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
cheque on 14.01.2015. On the other hand, an officer
of the insurance company deposed that the vehicle was
inspected on 19.01.2015 and thereafter, the certificate
of insurance was issued. This was obviously a false
statement simply because on 19.01.2015, the insured
vehicle was in the custody of the police and actually
was subjected to an inspection by the Inspector of
motor vehicles. This false evidence given by the
official would fundamentally indicate that the insurer
was trying to cover up the issuance of the premium
receipt on 14.01.2015.
21. As stated above, since the cheque was received under
receipt dated 14.01.2015, the risk would commence
from 14.01.2015 itself, insofar as the insurer was
concerned and consequently, the insurer was rightly
made liable to pay the compensation by the Tribunal.
22. The insurer also seeks to contend that the accident
occurred solely due to the negligence of the rider of the
- 17 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
motorcycle inasmuch as he was carrying two pillion
riders.
23. The Apex Court in Mohammed Siddique's case5 has
held that mere carrying of two pillion riders will not
lead to an inference that there was negligence on the
part of the rider of the motorcycle.
24. It will have to be stated here that in order to establish
negligence, the evidence of the driver of the lorry was
relied upon. On a reading of this evidence would
indicate that apart from stating that the rider of the
motor-cycle was driving at a higher speed, he has not
even indicated that the rider lost control because he
was carrying two pillion riders. In the absence of any
assertion by the driver of the lorry that the motorcycle
Mohammed Siddique & anr. Vs. National insurance company ltd. & ors. AIR 2020 SC 520
"13. ...... The fact that the deceased was riding on a motor cycle
along with the driver and another, may not, by itself, without
anything more, make him guilty of contributory negligence. At the
most it would make him guilty of being a party to the violation of
the law."
- 18 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
rider lost control because he was carrying two pillion
riders, negligence cannot be attributed to the rider of
the motorcycle alone.
25. It may also be pertinent to state here that the police
after investigation laid a charge-sheet against the
driver of the lorry and this, by itself, indicates that
there was an element of rash and negligent driving by
the driver of the lorry.
26. Consequently, even on the ground of negligence also,
the insurer's contentions are rejected.
27. In the result, there is no merit in the appeals filed by
the insurer and the appeals are therefore dismissed.
28. The amounts in deposit, if any, shall be transferred to
the Tribunal for disbursal in terms of the award.
IN MFA No.1904 OF 2020:
29. As far as the quantum of compensation in respect of
injuries suffered by Manjappa--rider of the motor-cycle
- 19 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
is concerned, the Tribunal on assessment of the
evidence has awarded a sum of Rs.11,17,500/- under
the following heads:
Compensation
Sl. awarded by the
Nature of Heads
No. Tribunal
(In Rs.)
1. Pain and sufferings 1,00,000/-
Conveyance, food, nourishment, 60,000/-
2.
attendant charges
Loss of future income due to 2,91,600/-
3.
disability
Loss of income during the laid 90,000/-
4.
up period
5. Medical expenses 4,45,793/-
6. Loss of future amenities in life 70,000/-
7. Future medical expenses 60,000/-
Total : 11,17,393/-
Rounded of to: 11,17,500/-
30. The Tribunal, on an analysis of the medical evidence,
has concluded that the claimant has suffered
permanent disability to the extent of 10% to the whole
body.
31. The Doctor who was examined has stated that he had
suffered disability to the extent of 68.5% in respect of
the right femur. In my view, since the claimant had
- 20 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
suffered a fracture to femur with a degloving injury and
also suffered a fracture of the right tibia, it would be
appropriate to re-assess the whole body disability of
the claimant at 20%.
32. As there is no proof of actual income earned by the
claimant, the Tribunal has assessed the monthly
income of the claimant notionally at Rs.9,000/-.
33. In cases where there is no actual proof of income, the
Karnataka State Legal Services Authority has also
determined the income ₹9,000/- for the accidents of
the year 2015. Hence, it is held that the notional
income determined by the Tribunal is just and proper.
34. Since the claimant has suffered 20% disability and he
was aged 25 years as on the date of the accident, as
per Pranay Sethi6, future prospects of 40% need to
be added to the said income. (Rs.9,000/- + Rs.3,600/- =
Rs.12,600/-).
National Insurance Company Limited vs. Pranay Sethi and Others - (2017)
16 SCC 680
- 21 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
35. Since the climate was aged 25 years as on the date of
the accident, as per Sarla Verma7, the appropriate
multiplier of '18' has to be applied.
36. Consequently, the claimant would be entitled to a sum
of Rs.5,44,320/- towards loss of future earnings
(Rs.12,600/- x 12 x 18 x 20%).
37. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-
towards pain and suffering and Rs.70,000/-
towards loss of future amenities. Having regard to
the percentage of disability sustained by the claimant,
the said sums awarded by the Tribunal are just and
appropriate and hence they are affirmed.
38. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.60,000/-
towards attendant, nutrition, food, conveyance
expenses; Rs.4,45,793/- towards medical
expenses; and Rs.60,000/- towards future medical
Sarla Verma and others vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and another, (2009) 6 SCC
- 22 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
expenses and in my considered view, the said sums
are also just and proper. Hence, they are also stand
affirmed.
39. A sum of Rs.90,000/- awarded towards loss of
income during the period of treatment is justified
since the claimant was hospitalised for more than four
months and hence, this sum is also affirmed.
40. Consequently, the award of the Tribunal is modified
and the claimant would be entitled to the following
compensation:
As awarded As awarded
Sl. by the by this
Nature of Heads
No. Tribunal Court
(In Rs.) (In Rs.)
1. Pain and sufferings 1,00,000/- 1,00,000/-
Conveyance, food, 60,000/- 60,000/-
2. nourishment, attendant
charges
Loss of future income 2,91,600/- 5,44,320/-
3. (Rs.12,600/- x 12 x 18
due to disability x 20%).
Loss of income during 90,000/- 90,000/-
4.
the laid up period
5. Medical expenses 4,45,793/- 4,45,793/-
6. Loss of future amenities 70,000/- 70,000/-
7. Future medical expenses 60,000/- 60,000/-
Total : 11,17,393/- 13,70,113/-
Rounded of to: 11,17,500/-
- 23 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
41. Thus, the claimant is held entitled to the total
compensation of Rs.13,70,113/- as against
Rs.11,70,500/-, along with interest at the rate of six
per cent per annum (as against 9%) from the date of
petition till its realization.
42. 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.
43. The apportionment, deposit and release of the
enhanced compensation amount shall be made as per
the ratio adopted by the Tribunal.
44. The appeal is accordingly allowed in part.
In MFA No.1908 OF 2020:
45. As far as the compensation awarded towards the
injuries suffered by the pillion rider--Shivu is
- 24 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
concerned, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of
₹1,64,000/- under the following heads:
Compensation
Sl. awarded by the
Nature of Heads
No. Tribunal
(In Rs.)
1. Pain and sufferings 25,000/-
Conveyance, food, nourishment, 20,000/-
2.
attendant charges
Loss of income during the laid 18,000/-
3.
up period
4. Medical expenses 90,200/-
5. Loss of future amenities in life 10,000/-
Total : 1,63,200/-
Rounded of to: 1,64,000/-
46. The Tribunal has come to the conclusion that claimant
had suffered a cut lacerated wound over left chin and
abrasion over face, a cut lacerated wound over left
elbow and right calf region and moderate head injury.
It has come to the conclusion that claimant has not
suffered any permanent disability and hence, has
awarded a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards pain and
suffering, and a sum of Rs.10,000/- towards loss of
amenities.
- 25 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
47. In my view, having regard the fact that the claimant
was hospitalised for eight days and suffered lacerated
wound and head injury, it would be appropriate to
award a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and
suffering, and Rs.40,000/- towards loss of
amenities.
48. A sum of Rs.20,000/- awarded towards attendant,
charges, nutritional food and convenience charges and
Rs.18,000/- awarded ordered towards loss of
income during the treatment period and
Rs.90,200/- towards medical expenses are just and
proper and hence, they are affirmed.
49. Consequently, the claimant would be entitled to the
following compensation:
As awarded As awarded
Sl. by the by this
Nature of Heads
No. Tribunal Court
(In Rs.) (In Rs.)
1. Pain and sufferings 25,000/- 50,000/-
Conveyance, food, 20,000/- 20,000/-
2. nourishment, attendant
charges
Loss of income during 18,000/- 18,000/-
3.
the laid up period
- 26 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
As awarded As awarded
Sl. by the by this
Nature of Heads
No. Tribunal Court
(In Rs.) (In Rs.)
4. Medical expenses 90,200/- 90,200/-
5. Loss of future amenities 10,000/- 40,000/-
Total : 1,63,200/- 2,18,200/-
Rounded of to: 1,64,000/-
50. Thus, the claimant is held entitled to the total
compensation of Rs.2,18,200/- as against
Rs.1,64,000/- along with interest at the rate of six per
cent per annum (as against 9%) from the date of
petition till its realization.
51. 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.
52. The apportionment, deposit and release of the
enhanced compensation amount shall be made as per
the ratio adopted by the Tribunal.
53. The appeal is accordingly allowed in part.
- 27 -
NC: 2024:KHC:46177
AND 2 OTHERS
54. Consequently, the appeals filed by the claimants in
MFA Nos.1904 and 1908 of 2020 are partly allowed
and the claimants would be entitled to the
compensation along with 6% interest per annum, as
against 9% awarded by the Tribunal.
55. The appeals filed by the insurer in MFA Nos.3682 of
2020, 5586 and 5587 of 2019 are dismissed.
56. The amounts in deposit, if any, shall be transmitted to
the Tribunal for disbursal in terms of the award.
Sd/-
(N S SANJAY GOWDA)
JUDGE
RK
