IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2195/2013(MV) BETWEEN:
MR. BHASKAR POOJARY AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS S/O HOOVAYYA POOJARY R/AT SRI. RAMA NIVAS PADIYAR, THENKA EDAPADAVU VILLAGE, SHIBRIKERE POST MANGALORE TALUK.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI. PRASAD & SMT. SANDHYA., ADVOCATES) AND:
1. MR. MOHAMMED ASIF S/O Y.C. ABDULLA AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT H NO.4-7-21B BLOCK NO.4, UCHILA UDUPI TALUK & DISTRICT.
2. THE NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE: K.S. RAO ROAD MANGALORE TALUK REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SIHIVARAJ PATIL., ADVOCATE FOR R-2 NOTICE TO R-1 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED:25.11.2013, ) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:15.06.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.173/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE 3RD ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, MANGALORE, D.K, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Claimant is seeking for enhancement of compensation not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
2. Perusal of the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal would disclose that Tribunal has awarded a total sum of Rs.2,46,900/- under the following heads:
3. Though it is contended by the appellant that compensation awarded under all heads is abysmally on the lower side, this Court finds that Tribunal, on appreciation of entire evidence and also taking into consideration the evidence of P.W.2 – Dr. Sudhakar, has awarded compensation under all the heads.
4. In fact, compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head ‘loss of future income’ is excessive, inasmuch as, Tribunal has construed the income of the claimant at Rs.1,000/- per month and without taking into consideration the extent of disability assessed by the Tribunal at 8% to the whole body and has concluded that claimant would be entitled to compensation of Rs.1,68,000/- (Rs.1000 x 12 x 14). Even if income of the claimant is construed as Rs.6,000/- per month and disability as assessed by the Tribunal is taken at 8% to the whole body, loss of income would be Rs.480/- per month and as such, compensation to which claimant would be entitled to would be Rs.80,640/- (Rs.6000/- x 8% disability = Rs.480 x 12 x 14). Thus, compensation awarded under the head “loss of future income” being excessive, question of enhancing compensation under other heads would not arise. Even if disability is taken as 16% to the whole body as canvassed, compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and it would not call for interference.
Hence, I proceed to pass the following:
JUDGMENT (i) Appeal is hereby dismissed.
(ii) Judgment and award dated 15.06.2012 passed by III Addl.Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Mangalore in MVC No. 173/2011 stands affirmed.
(iii) Registry to retransmit the records to Tribunal forthwith.
SD/- JUDGE *sp