1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.419 OF 2019(MV) C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.420 OF 2019(MV) IN MFA 419 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
DHANAPAL S/O KALIYAPPA, R/O ARAKERE VILLAGE, JAVAGAL HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK-573103, HASSAN DISTRICT.
(BY SRI. JAGADEESH.H.T., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. MANJUNATHA. G.
S/O G.M.GANGADHARAPPA, R/O PETE STREET, BANAVARA, ARSIKERE TALUK-573103.
2. THE MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BUSINESS CENTRE, SHOP NO.1 ...APPELLANT KASHI COMPLEX, B.H.ROAD, ARSIKERE, HASSAN DISTRICT-573201.
…RESPONDENTS THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 02.07.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.1377/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, ARSIKERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA 420 OF 2019 BETWEEN:
GANESHA, S/O. GOPAL, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, R/O. ARAKERE VILLAGE, JAVAGAL HOBLI, ARSIKERE TALUK-573103, HASSAN DISTRICT.
...APPELLANT (BY SRI. JAGADEESH.H.T., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. MANJUNATHA.G., S/O G.M.GANGADHARAPPA, R/O PETE STREET, BANAVARA, ARSIKERE TALUK-573103.
2. THE MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BUSINESS CENTER, SHOP NO.1, KASHI COMPLEX, BH ROAD, ARSIKERE, HASSAN DISTRICT-573201.
…RESPONDENTS THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 02.07.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.1378/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, ARSIKERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T These appeals are directed against the judgment and award dated 02.07.2018 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Arsikere in:
MVC No.1377/2017 wherein the claim petition came to be allowed in part and compensation of Rs.25,000/- came to be awarded together with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization.
MVC No.1378/2017 wherein the claim petition came to be allowed in part and compensation of Rs.20,000/- came to be awarded together with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization.
2. In order to avoid overlapping and confusion, parties are hereafter referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal.
3. The facts leading to the filing of the claim petition are that; on 03.11.2016, at about 6.00 pm., petitioners were going in a TVS vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA.13/R-136 from Arakere towards Banavara and on N.H.234, near Nanjesh Brick factory of Kenkere Village, another Car bearing Reg.No.KA.13/B-7674 came in a rash and negligent manner in order to endanger the human life, without observing the traffic rules and regulations, dashed against the petitioners’ vehicle and caused the accident.
4. Respondents contested the claim petitions.
The learned member considering the oral evidence of PWs.1 and 2 and documentary evidence at Exs.P1 to P9 and oral evidence of RWs.1 and 3 and documentary evidence at Exs.R1 to 4 on behalf of the respondent – Insurance Company, allowed the petition in part awarding the compensation as mentioned above. Against which claimants are before this Court seeking enhancement.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the compensation granted by the learned Member is on the lower side. The injuries suffered by the petitioners are as follows:
In MVC.1377/17 1. Deformity of right wrist and abrasion over inner aspect of right forearm.
2. Abrasion over occipital region with fresh bleeding.
MVC 1378/17 1. Abrasion with swelling over left knee.
2. Abrasion over left ring finger.
3. Abrasion over right wrist.
4. Pain and tenderness over right side of chest.
6. However, the disability is not mentioned nor opined. The petitioners are stated to be the coolies. The global compensation of Rs.25,000/- in MVC No.1377/2017 and Rs.20,000/- MVC No.1378/2017 together with interest of 9% per annum is awarded. Learned counsel would further submit that the compensation is very meager and requires to be enhanced.
7. On perusal of the appeal memos, I find this is not the one, wherein compensation has to be granted under different heads separately. The compensation granted at Rs.25,000/- and Rs.20,000/- appears to be just, fair and reasonable. There is no necessity of proceedings further in these appeals. Hence, both the appeals are rejected at this stage itself.
Sd/-
JUDGE GH