IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT M.F.A.NO.2862/2013 BETWEEN:
E.PAPANNA, S/O. EKANTHAPPA @ EKAPPA, AGE:31 YEARS, COOLIE WORK, R/O. HALE, DYAMAVVANA HALLY VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI.S.C.VIJAYA KUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. D.H. VENKATESHA, S/O. D.R.HANUMANNA, AGE 38 YEARS, R.C.OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE, REG.NO. KA-16/Q-6645, R/O. HOSAKALLAHALLY VILLAGE, CHITRADURGA TALUK-577 501.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, VIJAYASHREE, OPP:NANJUDESHWARA PETROLE BUNK, B.D.ROAD, CHITRADURGA-577 501. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.R.JAI PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R2;
R1-NOTICE DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 16.07.2015) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:4.9.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.24/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. MACT VI, CHITRADURGA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
JUDGMENT The claimant is before this Court in this appeal not being satisfied with the compensation awarded under Judgment and Award dated 04.09.2013 in M.V.C.No.24/2012 on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional M.A.C.T-VI, Chitradurga.
2. The claimant filed claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking compensation for the injuries suffered in a road traffic accident which occurred on 17.11.2011. When the claimant was walking on the left side of the road, motor-bike bearing No.KA-06/Q-6645 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him. As a result, he fell down and sustained severe injuries. He was shifted to Basaveshwara Hospital, Chitradurga, wherein he took treatment from 17.11.2011 to 26.11.2011. The claimant was a Coolie and he claims that he was earning Rs.9,000/- p.m. Further, he submits that the claimant suffered fracture of 1/3rd right tibia and has undergone operation. He was in- patient for ten days.
3. Further, learned counsel states that the compensation awarded on other heads is also on the lower side. Thus, he prays for enhancement of compensation.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-Insurance Company submits that the compensation awarded is just compensation which needs no interference.
5. On hearing the learned counsels and on perusal of the records, the only question which arises for consideration is as to:
“whether the claimant is entitled for enhanced compensation?”
6. The accident is of the year 2011. The claimant states that he is a Coolie and claims that he was earning Rs.9,000/- p.m. No material or document is produced to indicate the exact income of the claimant. In the absence of any material to indicate the exact income of the claimant, the income has to be assessed notionally. The Tribunal has taken Rs.3,000/- p.m., income of the claimant to assess the loss of future income due to disability, which is on the lower side. This Court and the Lok Adalaths normally would take Rs.6,500/- p.m., as notional income for accidents of the year 2011 while settling the accident claims. Hence, I deem it appropriate to assess the notional income of the claimant at Rs.5,000/- p.m., for determination of compensation on the head of loss of future income due to disability. The Tribunal, based on the evidence of P.W.2-doctor and on scrutiny of medical records, has rightly taken the total bodily disability of the claimant at 7% which is proper and needs no interference. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.20,000/- on the head pain and suffering, Rs.5,000/- on the head loss of future amenities and Rs.5,000/- towards travelling, conveyance and attendant charges which are on the lower side. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation on the head of loss of income during laid up period. Looking to the injuries suffered and hospitalization of the claimant, he would be out of employment for a minimum period of three months and he would be entitled for compensation on the said head.
7. Looking to the injuries suffered and as the claimant was in-patient for ten days and has undergone operation, he would be entitled for the following modified enhanced compensation:
Thus, the claimant would be entitled for compensation of Rs.1,96,320/- against Rs.1,07,440/-
awarded by the Tribunal with interest as awarded by the Tribunal.
8. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed-in-part.
Sd/- JUDGE bnv*