Karnataka High Court
Sri M Murugesha vs Sri Manish M Saliyan on 14 November, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:46272
MFA No. 935 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 935 OF 2021 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI. M. MURUGESHA,
S/O CHANGAPPA,
AGE ABOUT 27 YEARS,
R/AT NO.159, 1ST MAIN ROAD,
BATTARAHALLI, VIRGO NAGAR POST,
K. R. PURAM, BANGALORE - 560049.
PERMANENT ADDRESS: NO.11, 2 ND MAIN,
4TH CROSS, AKSHAYA NAGAR,
T. C. PALYA, MAIN ROAD,
R. M. NAGAR, BANGALORE - 16.
...APPELLANT
(BY SMT. SUGUNA REDDY, ADVOCATE(VC))
AND:
Digitally signed by
AASEEFA 1. SRI. MANISH M. SALIYAN,
PARVEEN S/O MAHENDRA R. SALIYAN,
Location: HIGH AGE ABOUT 34 YEARS,
COURT OF R/AT NO. 17, PRASHANTHI 1ST MAIN,
KARNATAKA 4TH STAGE KUVEMPU NAGAR,
MYSORE CITY AND DISTRICT,
PIN CODE - 570 023.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER,
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.,
UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE
LALBAGH MISSION ROAD,
BANGALORE.
...RESPONDENTS
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:46272
MFA No. 935 of 2021
(BY SRI. C. SHANKAR REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1- SERVED, UNREPRESENTED)
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.08.2019 PASSED IN
MVC NO.8335/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE IX ADDITIONAL
SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES,
MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU SCCH-7, 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 Smt.Suguna R. Reddy, learned counsel who
appears through video conference and represents the
appellant. Also heard Sri.C.Shankar Reddy, learned counsel for
respondent No.2 who appears physically before this Court.
2. Appellant, who admittedly sustained a grievous
injury in a road traffic accident, filed a petition claiming
compensation. The Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Bengaluru, which dealt with the matter as MVC No.8335/2016
rendered orders on 13.08.2019 awarding a sum of
NC: 2024:KHC:46272
Rs.2,31,004/- as compensation. Projecting that the said sum is
grossly low, the present appeal is filed.
3. Smt.Suguna R. Reddy, learned counsel representing
the appellant contends that the appellant was working as Fitter
under Engineering Contractors and Fabricators and was earning
Rs.600/- to 700/- per day. However, due to the injuries
sustained he became permanently and completely disabled. But
without considering the occupation and earnings of the
appellant, the Tribunal took the notional income of the
appellant as Rs.7,000/- per month which is unjustifiable.
Learned counsel also states that PW3 gave evidence to the
effect that the disability in respect of particular limb is 44% and
in respect of whole body is 22%. However, the Tribunal took
the disability in respect of whole body as 9% which is improper.
Learned counsel further submits that no amount is awarded as
compensation towards 'loss of amenities in life' and 'loss of
income during laid up period'. Learned counsel also contends
that the compensation granted by the Tribunal under all other
heads is grossly low. Learned counsel thereby seeks for
enhancement of compensation.
NC: 2024:KHC:46272
4. Per contra, Sri.C.Shankar Reddy, learned counsel
for respondent No.2 contends that the disability that is
assessed by the Tribunal is fair and proper. Learned counsel
also states that the compensation granted by the Tribunal
under all heads is highly justifiable. However, learned counsel
states that in case the Court intends to increase the notional
income, it can be done as per the Lok Adalath Chart.
5. The Tribunal through the impugned order awarded
a sum of Rs.2,31,004/- as compensation divided under
following heads:-
Heads Amount in Rs.
For pain and sufferings, 40,000-00
mental agony
Actual medical expenses 24,924-00
For special diet and 10,000-00
Conveyance.
Permanent disability 1,36,080-00
Future medical expenses 20,000-00
Total 2,31,004-00
6. Though the appellant projected that as Aluminium
and Iron Fabrication Fitter under Engineering Contractors and
Fabricators he was earning Rs.600/- to Rs.700/- per day, no
proof is produced either in respect of the occupation or
earnings by the date of accident. Also the qualification of the
NC: 2024:KHC:46272
appellant to work as Fitter is not established. However,
considering the submission that is made by both the learned
counsel, this Court considers desirable to take the notional
income of the appellant as Rs.9,500/- per month.
7. It is not in dispute that the appellant sustained
fracture of both bones of left leg. Having considered the
evidence produced both oral and documentary, the Tribunal
took the disability in respect of whole body as 9%. The
observations of the Tribunal in that regard are proper and
therefore this Court does not find any grounds to interfere with.
8. Having taken the notional income of the appellant
as Rs.9,500/- per month and without disturbing other
parameters i.e., application of '18' as multiplier and the
disability in respect of whole body as 9%, the compensation
which the appellant is entitled to under the head 'loss of future
earnings due to permanent physical disability in respect of
whole body' is as under:-
Heads Amount in Rs.
Notional monthly income 9,500-00
Annual income 1,14,000-00
On applying appropriate 20,52,000-00
multiplier '18'
NC: 2024:KHC:46272
Loss of future earnings on 1,84,680-00
account of permanent physical
disability, the same being 9%
in respect of whole body
9. Having considered the nature of injuries sustained
and the treatment taken, this Court is of the view that the
appellant could not have attended his normal pursuits atleast
for a period of three months. Thus, loss of earnings during laid
up period comes to Rs.28,500/- (Rs.9,500 x 3). Also having
considered the disability with which the appellant is left with,
this Court considers that the appellant is entitled to a sum of
Rs.20,000/- towards loss of amenities in life. Thus, the
compensation which the appellant is entitled to under different
heads is as under:-
Heads Amount in Rs.
Compensation for pain and 40,000-00
suffering
Medical expenses 24,924-00
Towards Food, Extra 15,000-00
nourishment, Attendant and
conveyance charges
Loss of future earnings 1,84,680-00
Loss of income during laid up 28,500-00
period
Loss of amentities in life 20,000-00
Future medical expenses 20,000-00
Total 3,33,104-00
NC: 2024:KHC:46272
10. The Tribunal through the impugned order awarded
a sum of Rs.2,31,004/- as compensation. However, the
justifiable sum which the appellant is entitled to in the light of
the foregoing discussion is Rs.3,33,104/-. 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 Additional
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru through
orders in M.V.C. No.8335/2016 dated 13.08.2019 is
enhanced from Rs.2,31,004/- to Rs.3,33,104/-.
iii. The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of
6% per annum 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 eight weeks from
the date of receipt of copy of this order.
NC: 2024:KHC:46272
v. On such deposit, appellant is permitted to
withdraw the entire amount.
Sd/-
(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA)
JUDGE
AP,VS
CT:TSM
