IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. SUDHINDRARAO MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3749/2019 (MV) C/W.
MISCELLANEIOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.3245/2019 (MV) M.F.A. NO.3749/2019 BETWEEN:
THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, BANGALORE METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION, CENTRAL OFFICE, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027 (BY SRI D. VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND SRI NANDAN N., S/O. NARAYAN, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/AT NO.9, 15TH CROSS, 8TH ‘B’ MAIN, RAGHAVENDRA COLONY, ... APPELLANT BSK 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE-560 070 ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI K.T. GURUDEV PRASAD, ADVOCATE) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.02.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.1893/2018, ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXIV ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, MAYO HALL UNIT, (SCCH-20), BANGALORE, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.2,95,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION.
M.F.A. NO.3245/2019 BETWEEN:
SRI NANDAN N., S/O. NARAYAN, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/AT NO.9, 15TH CROSS, 8TH ‘B’ MAIN, RAGHAVENDRA COLONY, BSK 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE-560 070 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI K.T. GURUDEV PRASAD, ADVOCATE) AND THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, BENGALURU METROPOLITAN TRANSPORT CORPORATION, K.H. ROAD, SHANTHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560 027 ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI D. VIJAYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED U/S.173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04.02.2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.1893/2018, ON THE FILE OF THE V ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXIV ACMM, MEMBER, MACT, MAYO HALL UNIT, (SCCH-20), BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT These two appeals are directed against the judgment and award dated 04.02.2019 passed in MVC No.1893/2018 on the file of the Member, MACT and V Additional Judge, Bangalore, (for short ‘the Tribunal’) wherein the claim petition came to be allowed in part by awarding compensation of Rs.2,95,000/- together with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition till realization.
2. M.F.A. No.3245/2019 is preferred by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and M.F.A. No.3749/2019 is preferred by the Insurance Company claiming that the impugned judgment and award directing the Insurance Company to pay the compensation is liable to be to set aside.
3. The facts leading to proceed under the provisions of MV Act are that on 27.03.2018 at about 10.30 p.m., the claimant met with an accident when he was traveling as a rider in his Motor Cycle bearing Regn. No.KA-01/HS-7049 on Nagasandra Road near Nettakallappa Circle, Bangalore, due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of BMTC Bus bearing Regn. No.KA-01/F-3863. It is stated that in the accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries to his right leg. X-ray revealed that Right Shaft of femur fracture and he underwent surgery and got an implant to the fracture.
4. Learned counsel Sri D. Vijayakumar for the Insurance Company would submit that accident has caused because of the negligence on the part of rider of motorcycle and the learned Tribunal erred in fastening the liability on the Insurance Company of Bus. He would further submit that the appeal is preferred both on the ground of negligence and quantum.
5. Learned counsel Sri K.T. Gurudev Prasad, for the claimant would submit that, a perusal of the sketch prepared by the Investigating Officer clearly shows that the bus went to the extreme end of right side and dashed against the claimant – rider of motorcycle. He would further submit that the monthly income considered by the Tribunal is on the lower side and there should be enhancement of compensation towards loss of amenities and towards future medical expenses.
6. The avocation of the claimant is stated to be a Car Driver and has suffered the functional disability and the Tribunal assessed the functional disability at 16% and total disability of 5%. The monthly income is considered at Rs.9,000/-. The age of the claimant is 22 years. The multiplier applicable is 18. Accordingly, the claimant is entitled to loss of income due to disability as under:
Rs.9,000/- x 5% x 12 x 18 = Rs.97,200/-
7. The Tribunal awarded the same. Thus, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of future income is just and reasonable neither high nor low. The entire break up of compensation awarded is right. Hence, it deserves to be maintained at its present structure.
8. Further, the Tribunal on appreciation of entire material on record has rightly fixed the liability on the Insurance Company, which does not call for interference by this Court.
9. Accordingly, both the appeals are rejected.
The amount in deposit shall be transferred to the Tribunal, forthwith.
Sd/- JUDGE Sbs*