IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. G. PANDIT M.F.A. NO.2994/2014 (MV) BETWEEN:
ERAYYA NARAYANA ACHARYA AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS S/O NARAYANA ACHARYA R/O CHIKKANSAL ROAD KUNDAPURA TALUK-576 201. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI.PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY H, ADV.) AND:
1. ABDUL LATHEEF AGE: MAJOR S/O ABDUL HAKEEM R/O GANESH NAGAR BHATKAL-576 203.
2. FIROJ KHAN AGE: MAJOR S/O SAMEEVULLA R/O GANESH NAGAR BHATKAL-576 203.
3. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., SAGAR BRANCH GOVINDA KRIPA BUILDING J C ROAD, SAGAR-577 201 REP. BY ITS MANAGER. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.O MAHESH, ADV. FOR R3 R1 & R2 NOTICE DISPENSED WITH V/O DT:23.02.2015) THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:10.01.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.374/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, KUNDAPURA, 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 appellant/claimant is before this Court not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded under the judgment and award dated 10.01.2014 passed in MVC No.374/2011 on the file of the Senior Civil Juge, Member, MACT, Kundapura.
2. The appellant/claimant filed petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation for the injuries suffered in a road traffic accident that occurred on 19.01.2011. It is stated that the petitioner was riding the bicycle while he was near Puravarga Church, a Motor Cycle bearing Reg. No.KA-
15 H-4199 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the claimant, due to which the petitioner sustained injuries. It is stated that the claimant was working as Carpenter and was earning Rs.15,000/- per month. Due to accidental injuries he suffered ‘Loss in Income and Future prospects’.
3. Upon service of notice, respondents 1 and 2 appeared before the Tribunal. The 3rd respondent - Insurance Company appeared and filed its statement contending that the accident had taken place due to the negligence of the claimant and not due to rash and negligent driving of the motor vehicle. The claimant examined himself as PW.1 and marked the documents Exs.P1 to P12. The trial Court based on the material on record awarded total compensation of Rs.57,550/- on the following heads :-
Pain and sufferings Rs.22,000/-
Medical expenses Rs. 9,550/-
Loss of earning during the laid up period Rs. 6,000/-
Loss of amenities Rs.20,000/- Total Rs.57,550/-
The appellant/claimant not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is before this Court seeking for enhancement of compensation.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the claimant has suffered the following injuries :-
i. Bone laceration of right leg-muscle laceration.
ii. Tenderness over the right shoulder fracture of scapula.
iii. Abrasion over the right hand.
It is stated that the claimant was inpatient from 19.01.2011 to 23.01.2011. Hence he submits that the compensation granted on the ‘Head pain and suffering is on the lower side”. Further he submits that the Tribunal has not granted any compensation on the head of ‘Incidental charges and conveyance’.
5. Per contra, learned counsel for the 3rd respondent – Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal has granted just and proper compensation and it needs no interference.
6. The claimant has suffered the injuries as stated above. He was inpatient for five days. Looking into the injuries suffered and the pain and suffering under gone, I am of the view, that the appellant/claimant would be entitled for another sum of Rs.10,000/- on the head ‘Pain and suffering’ in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation on the head ‘Incidental expenses and conveyance’ hence a sum of Rs.10,000/- is awarded on the said head. Thus the claimant would be entitled for a sum of Rs.20,000/- enhanced compensation in addition to the compensation of Rs.57,550/- awarded by the Tribunal.
Accordingly, the impugned judgment and award is modified and the appeal is allowed in part.
Sd/- JUDGE NG* CT:bms