Karnataka High Court
Mr Varun Manjunath V Shetty vs The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd on 25 February, 2025
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:8251
MFA No. 9773 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.9773 OF 2018(MV-I)
BETWEEN:
MR. VARUN MANJUNATH V. SHETTY,
@ VARUN MANJUNATH @ VARUN SHETTY,
S/O VARADARAJ SHETTY,
R/AT MARIGUDI BHANDARA HOUSE,
PINTO LANE, MARIGUDI TEMPLE,
BOLAR, MANGALURU.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI. GURUPRASAD B. R., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.,
EXTENSION COUNTER, 1ST FLOOR,
POOVA ARCADE, N.H.17, SURATHKAL,
Digitally signed MANGALURU
by AASEEFA REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.
PARVEEN
Location: HIGH 2. MR. HARISH SHETTY,
COURT OF S/O VISHWANATHA SHETTY,
KARNATAKA ADULT,R/AT SRI ADIMAYE KRIPA,
GAS AGENCY BUILDING,
NEAR KARNATAKA BANK,
THARDOLYA, JAPPINAMOGARU,
MANGALURU.
...RESPONDENTS
(SMT. NAYANASHREE, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. ASHOK N. NAYAK, ADVOCATE FOR R1;
NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH,
V/O. DATED 21.09.2021)
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:8251
MFA No. 9773 of 2018
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 11/06/2018, PASSED IN
MVC NO.1198/2015, ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE & MACT, MANGALURU, D.K., PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Heard Sri.Guruprasad.B.R, learned counsel for the
appellant as well as Ms.Nayanashree who represents
Sri.Ashok.N.Nayak, learned counsel on record for
respondent No.1.
2. Challenge in this appeal is the order that is
rendered by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal,
Mangaluru in MVC No.1198/2015 dated 11.06.2018. This
is a claimant's appeal.
3. As against the claim for Rs.20,00,000/- in total,
the Tribunal through the impugned order awarded a sum
of Rs.1,34,567/- as compensation and aggrieved by the
NC: 2025:KHC:8251
same, projecting that he is entitled for a higher sum, the
present appeal is filed.
4. Sri.Guruprasad.B.R, learned counsel for the
appellant, arguing the matter, contends that the appellant
sustained two grievous injuries and one simple injury
during the course of road traffic accident. He took
extensive treatment by remaining in hospital for a period
of 14 days. The appellant was working as an AC mechanic
and was earning Rs.15,000/- p.m. Due to the injury
sustained, he became permanently disabled. But without
considering the evidence produced, the Tribunal granted
meager sum as compensation and therefore, this appeal is
filed. Learned counsel thereby seeks for enhancement of
compensation.
5. Ms.Nayanashree representing respondent No.1
on the other hand submits that the appellant failed to
produce any evidence to show that he is permanently and
completely disabled. Learned counsel submits that the
NC: 2025:KHC:8251
compensation granted to the appellant is just and proper
and therefore, the appeal is not maintainable.
6. The Tribunal through the impugned order
awarded a sum of Rs.12,500/- under the head pain and
suffering, Rs.1,10,167/- towards medical expenses,
Rs.4,200/- towards conveyance, Rs.4,200/- towards
nourishment, Rs.3,500/- towards attendant charges and
thus the Tribunal granted a sum of Rs.1,34,567/- as
compensation in total.
7. It is not in dispute that the appellant took
treatment as inpatient for a period of 14 days. As per the
contents of Ex.P6 - wound certificate, it is clear that the
appellant sustained lacerated injury on his scalp which is
simple in nature. He also sustained fracture of odontoid
process of the cervical vertebrae and fracture of right
tranverse process of L1 (Lumbar vertebrae). Those two
injuries are grievous in nature.
NC: 2025:KHC:8251
8. The appellant through the evidence of Pw.2, his
employer, succeeded in establishing that he was earning
Rs.15,000/- p.m. by the date of accident.
9. Having considered the nature of injuries
sustained and the treatment taken, this Court is of the
view that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.35,000/-
under the head pain and suffering. The medical expenses
to the extent proved is Rs.1,10,167/-. Also the appellant is
entitled to a sum of Rs.15,000/- towards food, extra
nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges. Having
regard to the nature of injuries sustained and the
treatment taken, this Court is of the view that the
appellant would have taken bed rest at least for a period
of three months. Thus loss of earnings during laid up
period comes to RS.45,000/- (Rs.15,000X3). The appellant
failed to produce any evidence to establish the aspect of
disability. However, the appellant is entitled to a sum of
Rs.15,000/- towards loss of amenities in life.
NC: 2025:KHC:8251
10. Therefore, the compensation which the
appellant is entitled to under different heads is as under:
Sl. Description Amount
No
1 Compensation for pain
Rs.35,000
and suffering
2 Medical expenses Rs.1,10,167
3 Towards food, extra
nourishment, conveyance Rs.15,000
and attendant charges
4 Loss of income during
Rs.45,000
laid up period
5 Loss of amenities in life Rs.15,000
Total Rs.2,20,167
11. 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 Accident Claims Tribunal, Mangaluru
through orders in MVC No.1198/2015
NC: 2025:KHC:8251
dated 11.06.2018 is enhanced from
Rs.1,34,567/- to Rs.2,20,167/-.
(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.1 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
