IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. L. NARAYANA SWAMY, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE M.F.A. NO.7091 OF 2014 (MV) BETWEEN:
K. HALESH S/O KARIYAPPA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, COOLIE WORKER, D. NO.342/2, 3RD MAIN, 17TH CROSS, IN FRONT OF SHAVIGE NAGAPPA’S SHOP KTJ NAGAR, DAVANAGERE TALUK, PIN - 577 001.
(BY SRI. SHASHIDHARA R, ADV.) AND:
1. MANJUNATHA G.S.
S/O G.B.SANJEEVMURTHY, AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS, RIDER/OWNER OF HERO HONDA BEARING REG NO. KA-17/EH-1223, R/O NEAR GRAM PANCHAYATH, KAMALAPURA POST, HARIHARA TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-577 601.
2. THE MANAGER IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ... APPELLANTS LAWYER ROAD, K.J. EXTENSION, DAVANAGERE - 577 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.E.I.SANMATHI, ADV. FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:7.3.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.257/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT-5, DAVANGERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR FURTHER ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T On 16th January 2013, when the appellant was walking at the edge of road in Banuvalli village, the offending vehicle hit him from the back and the impact of which he suffered injuries to right leg, back of head, left shoulder and other parts of the body. Primarily, he had taken treatment at CG Hospital, Davanagere and further he took treatment at Navodaya Hospital, Davanagere by undergoing surgery. Hence, he made claim petition before the 1st Additional Senior Civil Judge and Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-V at Davanagere. The Tribunal, by its judgment and award dated 07th March, 2014 passed in MVC No.257 of 2013, awarded compensation of Rs.2,73,000/- with interest at 6% per annum. Being not satisfied with the compensation awarded, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is very much on the lower side. Though the appellant has stated that he has spent more than Rs.80,000/- towards medical expenses, the Tribunal has erred in awarding only Rs.50,000/-. He submits that the compensation awarded under all heads require to be enhanced. Hence he seeks to allow the appeal.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent-insurer supports the award of the Tribunal and submits to dismiss the appeal.
4. The accident is not in dispute. In the accident the appellant has suffered fracture of both bones of left leg and crush injury over parietal region of head of which fracture of both bones of leg is a grievous injury. The Doctor who has examined the appellant on 29th October, 2013 has opined that the injured complains of pain in left leg, difficulty in walking for long distance and he walks with limping. It is also opined that there is deformity and tenderness and has opined that the injured has got 30% disability. It is stated in the claim petition that the appellant was doing coolie work and was earning Rs.10,000/- per month. The Tribunal has disbelieved the same and has assessed the income at Rs.5,000/-. In the cases where the income is proved by the appellant or the claimants, the Court should taken a notional income. The same shall be taken considering relevant factors like year of accident, number of dependents, place of residence, etc. In the instant case, the accident is of the year 2013 and the injured was aged 28 years at the time of accident. With relevance to the year of accident, the monthly income is to be assessed at Rs.7,500/- per month. Accordingly, the calculation under the head future loss of income would be Rs.7,500/- x 12 x 17 x 15% = Rs.2,29,500/-. The same is awarded as against Rs.1,53,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Given the fact that the appellant has suffered fracture, and might have taken a month’s rest taking Rs.7,500/- as monthly income, the same amount is awarded under the head loss of income during the laid-up period. Considering the nature of injury and the agony undergone by the appellant, I intend to award another Rs.20,000/- under the head pain and suffering. Taking note of the fact that the appellant has to bear the pain and agony for the rest of his life, Rs.20,000/- is awarded under the head Amenities, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.50,000/- towards medical, attendant charges and incidental expenses. It has come in the course of the judgment of the Tribunal that the appellant has produced Medical bills for Rs.47,000/-. When that is so, it is to be stated that the amount awarded towards Attendant and incidental charges is very meagre. The appellant was an inpatient for nine days and also he has gone for further examination. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to award another Rs.10,000/- towards incidental expenses. The Doctor has deposed that the appellant has to undergo another surgery for removal of implants. Keeping the cost escalation in mind, Rs.15,000/- is awarded under the head future medical expenses. In total, the enhanced compensation would be 1,41,500/-. Considering the fact that the enhanced compensation accrues interest at the rate as is awarded by the Tribunal, in all if the global compensation of Rs.1,64,000/- is awarded, that would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly a global compensation of Rs.1,64,000/- is awarded in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal.
In the result, appeal is allowed in part.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE lnn