IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR M.F.A.NO.10053 OF 2018 (MV) BETWEEN B.V. Umaprasad S/o. B.G. Vishwanath Aged about 43 years R/o. Hole Belur Halli Kasaba Hobli, Alur Taluk Hassan District.
Present address at:
Sanoji Nilaya, 1st Cross 1st Main Road, Hemavathi Nagar Hassan-573 201. …Appellant (By Sri. Girish.B. Baladare, Advocate) AND 1. The Manager National Insurance Company Ltd., Manjunatha Complex Old Bus Stand Road Hassan-573 201.
2. Ajith.C.
S/o. C.S. Chandrashekar Major, R/o. Chikkakanagalu T. Guddenahalli Post Alur Taluk Hassan District-573 201. …Respondents (By Sri. E.I. Sanmathi, Advocate for R1; v/o dtd. 08.08.2019 notice to R2 d/w) This appeal is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and order dated 18.08.2018 passed in MVC.No.1453/2015 on the file of the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and Mact, Hassan, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.
This Appeal coming on for Orders this day the Court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT This appeal has been filed by the claimant aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award dated 18.08.2018 (for short ‘the Tribunal’), in M.V.C.No.1453/2015, awarding a sum of Rs.9,39,450/- together with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realization towards the injuries sustained by the claimant-appellant in a road traffic accident that occurred on 25.01.2015.
2. Though the matter is listed for orders, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
3. Both the counsels submit that the occurrence of accident as well as the coverage of the policy of the offending vehicle by the respondent No.1-Insurance company is not in dispute and this appeal is restricted to quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant-claimant submits that the Tribunal committed an error in assessing the notional income of the claimant at Rs.6,000/- per month. In this context, it is contended that the notional income of the claimant should be taken at Rs.9,000/- per month as per the Lok Adalat guidelines in view of the undisputed fact that the accident occurred in the year 2015. Further, it is also contended that the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding a sum of Rs.18,000/- only under the head ‘Income during laid up period’ and Rs.30,000/- was awarded under the head ‘loss of amenities’ are very meager and inadequate and the same needs to be enhanced by this Court. He therefore requests for modification of the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
5. The learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance company would support the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
6. I have given my careful consideration to the rival submissions and perused the material on record.
7. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellant, the Tribunal has committed a grave and serious error and law of fact in taking the notional income as Rs.6,000/- p.m. as against Rs.9,000/- p.m. as per the Lok Adalat guidelines, in view of the undisputed fact that the accident occurred in the year 2015. Accordingly, taking the notional income of the appellant as Rs.9,000/- p.m., the appellant would be entitled to additional sum of Rs.59,400/- under the head ‘loss of future earnings’.
8. It is also contended that, having regard to the fact the notional income of the appellant is taken as Rs.9,000/- p.m., the appellant would be entitled to proportionate additional compensation of Rs.9,000/- under the head ‘loss of income during laid up period’.
9. The material on record would also indicate that the appellant would be entitled to additional sum of Rs.10,000/- under the head ‘loss of amenities’.
10. Further, the appellant would also be entitled to additional sum of Rs.10,000/- under the head ‘pain and sufferings’.
11. Thus, the appellant would be entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.88,400/- under the following heads:
1 Loss of future earnings Rs.59,400/-
2 Pain and sufferings Rs.10,000/-
3 Loss of income during laid up period 4 Loss of future happiness and amenities Rs. 9,000/- Rs.10,000/-
Total Rs.88,400/-
12. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I pass the following:
ORDER (i) The appeal is partly allowed.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified awarding additional compensation of Rs.88,400/- which shall carry interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE SSD