Karnataka High Court
Sri. Narayanaswamy vs The Managing Director K.S.R.T.C on 23 October, 2024
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:42642
MFA No. 850 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 850 OF 2022 (MV-I)
BETWEEN:
SRI. NARAYANASWAMY,
S/O CHIKKAKEMPANNA,
AGE 60 YEARS,
R/AT HENNURU KADIRENAHALLI,
JATHAVARA (P), JATHAVARA,
CHIKKABALLAPURA (T) AND (D) - 562 101.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SURESH M. LATUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
K.S.R.T.C, K.H. ROAD,
SHANTHI NAGAR,
Digitally signed by BENGALURU - 560 027.
AASEEFA PARVEEN
Location: HIGH ...RESPONDENT
COURT OF
KARNATAKA (BY SRI. K. NAGARAJAIAH, ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. RADHA B.P, ADVOCATE)
THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 12.11.2021 PASSED IN MVC
NO. 5467/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF JUDGE, COURT OF
SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, PRINCIPAL MACT, BENGALURU
(SCCH-1), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:42642
MFA No. 850 of 2022
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is the out come of the order that is
rendered by the Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal,
Bengaluru in M.V.C. No.5467/2019 dated 12.11.2021.
2. This is a claimants appeal. The tribunal through
the impugned order awarded a sum of Rs.5,08,080/- as
compensation and dissatisfied with the sum thus awarded,
the claimant preferred the present appeal.
3. Heard Sri.Suresh.M Latur learned counsel for the
appellant who appeared through video conference. Also
heard Sri.K.Nagarajaiah learned counsel who represented
Smt.Radha B.P learned counsel on record for the
respondent.
NC: 2024:KHC:42642
4. Arguing on merits, Sri.Latur Suresh M
representing the appellant contended that the tribunal
awarded a meager sum as compensation under the head
pain and suffering, towards food nourishment and
attendant charges, towards transportation charges and
towards medical expenses. Learned counsel also stated
that the appellant took treatment for a long period of eight
months but the tribunal awarded a meager sum towards
loss of income during laid up period. Learned counsel also
submitted that even the amount awarded under the head
loss of future earnings and loss of amenities is inadequate.
Learned counsel further contended that compensation
towards loss of amenities in life is not awarded separately.
Learned counsel further stated that for recovery, the
appellant requires to undergo two more surgeries. Learned
counsel thereby sought for enhancement of compensation.
Regarding the earnings, learned counsel for the appellant
stated that the appellant as an agriculturist and as
business man was earning Rs.25,000/- per month.
NC: 2024:KHC:42642
5. Learned counsel who represented the respondent
i.e., Sri.K.Nagarajaiah on the other hand stated that the
accident occurred in the year 2019 and the figure that is
adopted by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority
for the relevant period i.e., Rs.14,000/- may be taken into
consideration.
6. The appellant produced sufficient proof that he has
got license to run a store and that he was owning
agricultural property. However, the appellant failed to
produce substantive proof in respect of his earnings.
Therefore, this Court is of the view that the notional
income of the appellant is required to be taken as
Rs.14,000/- per month.
7. It is not in dispute that the appellant sustained
fracture to left ankle lateral malleolus, distal tibia and
fibula fracture, nasal bone fracture, which are all grievous
in nature.
8. It is also brought on record that the appellant
initially underwent an operation for the fracture of right
NC: 2024:KHC:42642
ankle and thereafter another surgery was conducted
where external fixation to right leg below knee was done.
Also it is brought on record that the appellant took
treatment both as inpatient and out patient nearly for a
period of eight months.
9. Tribunal considering the evidence that is produced
by both sides awarded a sum of Rs.38,280/- towards
medical expenses which requires no interference.
10. The disability as assessed by the tribunal in
respect of whole body i.e., 20% also requires no
interference.
11. Further the tribunal considered the age of the
appellant as 60 years and applied the multiplier 9. As the
same is appropriate, it requires no interference.
12. Taking into consideration the earnings of the
appellant as Rs.14,000/- per month, the compensation
which the appellant is entitled to under the head loss of
future earning is as under:-
NC: 2024:KHC:42642
Heads Amount in Rs.
Notional monthly income 14,000-00
Annual income 1,68,000-00
On Applying appropriate 15,12,000-00
multiplier '9'
Loss of future earnings, 3,02,400-00
permanent physical
disability in respect of whole
body being 20%
13. As it is clearly brought on record that the
appellant was taking treatment for a period of eight
months, the loss of income during laid up period comes to
Rs.1,12,000/- (14,000 x 8).
14. Having considered the submissions made by both
sides and upon perusing entire material that is brought on
record, this Court is of the view that the compensation
awarded under the head pain and suffering, food
nourishment and attendant charges requires slight
enhancement. Also this Court is of the view that the
appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.20,000/- towards loss
of amenities in life.
NC: 2024:KHC:42642
15. Thus, the compensation which the appellant is
entitled to under different heads is as under:-
Heads Amount in Rs.
Pain and sufferings 80,000-00
Medical expenses 38,280-00
Towards Food, nourishment 20,000-00
and attendant charges
Transportation charges 10,000-00
Loss of future earnings 3,02,400-00
Loss of amenities in life 20,000-00
Loss of income during laid 1,12,000-00
up period
Future medical expenses 20,000-00
Total 6,02,680-00
16. In the light of the foregoing discussion, this Court
is of the view that the compensation which the appellant is
entitled to is Rs.6,02,680/-.
Thus, the appeal is disposed of with the following:-
ORDER
i. The appeal is allowed in part.
ii. The compensation that is awarded by the Principal
Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru through
orders in M.V.C. No.5467/2019 dated 12.11.2021 is
enhanced from Rs.5,08,080/- to Rs.6,02,680/-.
NC: 2024:KHC:42642
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 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum
within a period of 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
VS
CT: BHK
