IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR M.F.A.NO.5867 OF 2017(MV-I) BETWEEN BALLEGOWDA S/O KADAIAH AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS R/O SWARNASANDRA 4TH CROSS MANDYA CITY - 571403 ...APPELLANT (BY SRI SREENIVASAN M.Y., ADVOCATE) AND 1. NAGARAJU M S/O MUNIYAPPA MAJOR R/O NO 832A 8TH MAIN ROAD III STAGE PRAKASHNAGAR BENGALURU - 560021 2. THE BRANCH MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTD BRANCH OFFICE NO 1200, 2ND CROSS, ASHOKNAGAR MANDYA CITY NOW TRANSFERRED TO DIVISIONAL OFFICE, J L B ROAD CHAMUNDIPURAM MYSURU - 570023 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI S.V.HEGDE MULKUND, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 05.04.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.1862/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT AT MANDYA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This appeal has been filed by the appellant-claimant aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award dated 05.04.2017 passed by the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Mandya, in MVC.No.1862/2012 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’ for short) whereby the Tribunal has awarded a global compensation in a sum of Rs.5,000/- in favour of the appellant together with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of claim petition till realization towards the injuries sustained by the claimant-appellant in a road traffic accident that occurred on 19.07.2007.
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. Learned counsel for the appellant-claimant submits that having regard to the unimpeached evidence of the appellant-claimant (PW.1) coupled with the documentary evidence on record which clearly establish that the appellant-claimant had sustained grievous injuries, the Tribunal committed an error in answering the issue No.2 against the appellant-claimant on the ground that the Doctor who treated the appellant-claimant was not examined. It is therefore contended that the global compensation of Rs.5,000/- was awarded by the Tribunal is highly inadequate and meager and same requires enhancement by this Court.
4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent No.1 would support the impugned order.
5. I have given my anxious consideration to the rival submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material on record.
6. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellant-claimant that notwithstanding the fact that the Doctor who treated the appellant-claimant was not examined so as to establish the severity of the injuries sustained by the appellant-claimant in the accident, the finding recorded by the Tribunal in Issue No.1 at para No.13, to the effect that the appellant-claimant had sustained grievous injuries on account of the accident is sufficient to come to the conclusion that the appellant-claimant would be entitled to compensation under the head ‘pain and suffering’ as well as under the head ‘loss of amenities’.
7. Having regard to the material on record, I am of the considered opinion that the appellant-claimant would be entitled to additional compensation in a sum of Rs.40,000/- as hereunder:
8. Thus, the appellant-claimant would be entitled to additional enhanced compensation in a sum of Rs.40,000/- together with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till realization.
9. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I pass the following:
ORDER (i) The appeal is partly allowed.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 05.04.2017 passed by the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Mandya, in MVC.No.1862/2012 is hereby modified.
(iii) The appellant-claimant would be entitled to additional enhanced compensation of Rs.40,000/- together with 6% interest from the date of claim petition till realization.
(iv) The additional enhancement compensation amount is directed to be released in favour of the appellant-claimant.
Sd/-
JUDGE SSD