IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.NARENDAR M.F.A. NO.760/2017 C/W M.F.A. NO.2214/2018 (MV) IN M.F.A. NO.760/2017:
BETWEEN:
1. THE MANAGER ICICI LOMBARD MOTOR INS. CO. LTD, ICICI LOMBARD HOUSE 414 VEER SAVARKAR MARG NEAR SIDHI VINAYAKA TEMPLE PRABHADEVI, MUMBAI-400035.
2. THE MANAGER ICICI LOMBARD GIC LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, KOHINOOR ROAD MADIKERI NOW BOTH APPELLANTS REPRESENTED BY ITS THE REGIONAL MANAGER REGIONAL OFFICE ICICI LOMBARD GEN INS CO. LTD., #121, THE ESTATE BUILDING 9TH FLOOR, DICKSON ROAD BANGALORE-42. …. APPELLANTS (BY SRI. PRADEEP B, ADV.,) AND:
1. T.P. MOHAMMED SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S 1(A) SMT. FATHIMA W/O T.P. MOHAMMED.
1(B) KULUSU W/O ALI, D/O T.P. MOHAMMAD.
1 (C) T.M. MUSTAFA D/O T.P. MOHAMMAD.
1 (D) SAMSUDEEN S/O T.P. MOHAMMAD.
1 (E) T.M. JAFFAR S/O T.P. MOHAMMAD.
ALL ARE R/AT. THITHIMATHI POST VINAYAKA NAGAR NOKY, VIRAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571218.
AMENDED VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 24-10-2019.
2. NEEFUN S/O LATE PEMMAIAH NOW AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT BALAJI VILLAGE MAYAMUDI POST KODAGU DIST.-571213. … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. SACHIN B.S. ADV., FOR R1 LR’S OF DECEASED R1(A-E) R2 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:31-8-2016 PASSED IN MVC No.38/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, VIRAJPET, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.3,85,878/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION FROM THE RESPONDENTS JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY.
IN M.F.A. NO.2214/2018:
BETWEEN:
SRI. T.P. MOHAMMAD SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LR’S 1(A) SMT. FATHIMA W/O T.P. MOHAMMAD 1(B) KULUSU W/O ALI, D/O T.P. MOHAMMAD 1 (C) T.M. MUSTAFA S/O T.P. MOHAMMAD 1 (D) SAMSUDEEN S/O T.P. MOHAMMAD 1 (E) T.M. JAFFAR S/O T.P. MOHAMMAD ALL ARE R/AT. THITHIMATHI POST VINAYAKA NAGAR NOKY, VIRAJPET TALUK KODAGU DISTRICT-571218.
(BY SRI. SACHIN B.S. ADV.,) AND:
…. APPELLANTS 1. SRI. NEEFUN S/O LATE PEMMAIAH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/AT BALAJI VILLAGE MAYAMUDI POST KODAGU DIST.-571213.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER ICICI LOMBARD MOTOR INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., ICICI LOMBARD HOUSE 414 VEER SAVARKAR MARG, NEAR SIDHI VINAYAK TEMPLE PARBHADEVI, MUMBAI-25.
3. THE BRANCH MANAGER ICICI LOMBARD MOTOR INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, KOHINOOR ROAD MADIKERI-571201.
… RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADV., FOR R2 &R3 NOTICE TO R1 D/W) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:31-8-2016 PASSED IN MVC No.38/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MACT, VIRAJPET, 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 Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-insurer and the learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The appellant is before this court being aggrieved by the sum awarded as compensation on account of the injury suffered in an accident. Though the matter is listed for ‘Admission’, with the consent of the counsels the appeal is taken up for disposal.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that there is no dispute with regard to the liability of the insurer to satisfy the award. He would contend that the sum awarded under the head of pain and suffering is on the higher side and tribunal ought not to have awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and the same is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court. He would further contend that the tribunal erred in awarding interest at the rate of 9% p.a.
4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents- claimants would contend that the tribunal has adopted Rs.6,000/- as the notional income and the same is on the lower side. On perusal of the award it is seen that the tribunal has discussed the medical evidence produced by the claimant who unfortunately passed away during the pendency of the appeal and the legal representatives of the deceased claimant have come on record. The tribunal has taken note of the multiple rounds of hospitalization and the procedures undergone on account of the non-union of the right femer shaft and the opinion of the doctor that the patient requires further six months recovery and the disability is to be assessed after completion of treatment, the tribunal has also taken note of the various bills and the discharge summary detailing the treatments and follow-up treatments received by the claimant at his native and in Mangalore. In that view of the matter, this court is of the opinion that the sum awarded as Rs.1,00,000/- under the head of pain and suffering and mental agony is not on the higher side. The tribunal has taken into consideration all the aspects including the frequent travels to the hospital at Mangalore etc. and the extended period of hospitalization and the rest period advised by the doctor. Hence, the sums awarded under various heads and under the other heads are also conservative and cannot be labeled as exorbitant in view of the prolonged suffering. In that view of the matter, this court is of the considered opinion that the sum awarded as compensation represents a just and fair compensation and does not call for any interference at the hands of this court. With regard to the issue of interest this court is of the opinion that the tribunal erred in awarding interest at 9% p.a. for the period from the date of petition till realization. This court is of the opinion that the rate of interest awarded is on the higher side and tribunal ought to have awarded the interest at 6% p.a. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. The rate of interest awarded at 9 % p.a. is modified to 6% p.a.
5. Amount in deposit be transmitted to the tribunal and the amount shall be disbursed to the respondents. The office while drawing-up decree shall also take into consideration the order dated 24.10.2019. Thereby, this court has been pleased to deny the interest for the delayed period of 468 days.
6. In view of the above order, the appeal preferred by the claimants-appellants in connected M.F.A. No.2214/2018 stands dismissed.
Office to draw-up decree accordingly.
Sd/- JUDGE Chs* CT:MS