IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.1 OF 2017 (MV) BETWEEN:
BALARAM, S/O. LATE VENKATASWAMY NAIDU, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, R/O. D.NO.232/6, B, MUKTHI HALAMMA TEMPLE, 2ND CROSS, JALAHALLI VILLAGE, BENGALURU, PERMANENT ADDRESS: HOUSE NO.NWC 156/B, NEW COLONY, BHADRAVATHI, SHIMOGA DISTRICT-577 301.
(BY SRI. SREENIVASAN.M.Y, ADV.,) AND:
1. BHEEMA NAIKA, S/O. THIMMANAIKA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, THANGLI THANDYA, KADUR TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577 548.
2. B. CHANDRASHEKAR, S/O. N. BASAPPA, MAJOR, R/O MALLIDEVI HALLI, ... APPELLANT KADUR TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALUR DISTRICT-577 547.
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., REP. BY BRANCH MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE AT P B NO.114, CRESCENT COURT, K M ROAD, CHIKKAMAGALUR-577 101 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. O MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R3; NOTICE TO R1 & R2 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT PASSED BY IV ADDL. DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE, SHIMOGA, SITTING AT BHADRAVATHI IN M.V.C.814/2013 ON 29/03/2016 THEREBY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION SUITABLY WITH INTEREST, AND GRANT SUCH OTHER RELIEFS IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondents No.1 to 3. Perused the records.
2. Though the matter is listed for admission, with consent of both the parties, the same is heard for final disposal.
3. The injured-claimant has preferred this appeal, being not satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded in the impugned judgment dated 29.03.2016 passed by the IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Shimoga, sitting at Bhadravathi rendered in MVC No.814/2013, seeking enhancement of compensation.
4. The facts of the case are that on 09.08.2012 at about 8.30 p.m., when the injured-claimant was proceeding on his bike bearing Reg.No.KA-14/E-4475, a tractor-trailer bearing Registration No.KA-18/T-7192 driven in a rash and negligent manner dashed against the bike and he sustained grievous injuries.
5. After service of notice, the owner of the offending vehicle as well as the insurer did appear before the tribunal, filed their written statement and contested the claim petition. During the enquiry before the tribunal, the claimant has established the occurrence of the accident, actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle and its insurance coverage and the same has remained unchallenged either by the owner of the vehicle or by the insurer.
6. The Tribunal, after evaluation of the oral and documentary evidence has held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligence of the driver of the offending vehicle and consequently awarded total compensation of Rs.3,11,130/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization under the following heads:
Sl Headings Amount No Rs.
Total Rs.3,11,122-00 Rounded off to Rs.3,11,130-00 7. The learned counsel for the appellant vehemently submitted that the tribunal erred in assessing the income of the injured at Rs.14,000/- and that the compensation awarded towards ‘nutritious food, attendant and conveyance charges’ ‘future medical expenses’ and ‘loss of amenities’ are on the lower side and prays for enhancement in the compensation.
8. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the insurer submitted that the tribunal, on appreciation of the evidence and material on record has rightly assessed the income of the injured and awarded just and fair compensation, which does not calls for interference and prays for dismissal of the appeal.
9. On careful evaluation of the material on record, it is seen that the injured claimant had sustained fracture of pelvis and urethral injury which are grievous in nature. Petitioner was an inpatient in KMC Manipal Hospital and took treatment for a period of 15 days. He underwent emergency suprapubic cystostomy and fracture was treated with postural reduction and pelvic binder. Under such circumstances, having regard to the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, period of treatment undergone by the injured and consequential disability sustained by him, the compensation awarded by the tribunal is on the lower side.
10. However, the learned counsels for the appellant and Respondent No.3 have filed a joint memo to the effect that the Respondent No.3 - Insurance Company shall pay an additional compensation of Rs.2,25,000/- in full and final settlement of the claim.
11. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part.
In modification of the impugned judgment and award dated 29.03.2016 passed by the IV Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Shimoga, sitting at Bhadravathi rendered in MVC No.814/2013, the compensation payable to the claimant is enhanced from Rs.3,11,130/- to Rs.5,36,130/- (enhanced compensation is Rs.2,25,000/-). Respondent No.3- insurer shall deposit the enhanced compensation with interest before the tribunal within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment and on such deposit, the same shall be disbursed to the claimant, on proper identification. However, the impugned judgment and award, in so far as it relates to the rate of interest and deposit is concerned, shall remain unaltered.
There shall be no order as to costs. Office to draw the decree accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE bnv*