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 MISCELLANEOUS FRIST APPEAL NO.7012 OF 2014 (MV) BETWEEN:
L.RAVINDRA KUMAR AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, S/O LATE LAKSHMINARAYANAPPA R/AT 75, II MAIN ROAD, MUNIRAMANNA BLOCK, GANGANAGAR R T NAGAR POST, BENGALURU – 560 032 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI.KRISHNA REDDY R, ADV.) AND:
1. SRI.SHIVARAJU H.G S/O H.N.GANGANNA GOWDA, NO.271, 7TH MAIN ROAD, 20TH CROSS, BTM 2ND STAGE, B G ROAD, N S PALYA, BENGALURU – 560 076 2. IFFCO TOKIO GENERAL INS. CO. LTD. NO.41, 2ND FLOOR, CRISTU COMPLEX, LAVELLE ROAD, BENGALURU – 560 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER ... 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:25.08.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.2996/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE XII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T For the injuries suffered in the road traffic accident on 20th August 2010, the claimant made claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Bangalore. The Tribunal, by its judgment and award dated 25th August 2014 passed in MVC No.2996 of 2011 awarded compensation of Rs.1,76,520/- with interest at 6% per annum. This appeal is preferred, seeking enhancement in the compensation.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has committed an error in not appreciating the evidence on record and has awarded meagre compensation. He submits that the compensation awarded under different heads is also on the lower side and hence seeks enhancement in the compensation.
3. The learned counsel for the respondent-insurer submits to dismiss the appeal. He submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for interference in this appeal.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the judgment passed by the Tribunal. There is some force in the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant. The Tribunal has awarded compensation as follows:
Sl.No. Pain and suffering Amount Rs.
5. The claimant has suffered fracture of both bones (tibia and fibula) of right leg displaced and at the junction of middle and lower one third for which he was operated with closed reduction and internal fixation with nail and the Doctor has deposed that the injured has difficulty to stand bear weight on right leg, to sit cross-legged, to squat, to climb the stairs and to walk on the slopes. He has also suffered range of movement of right knee joint, flexion extension 125 degree, loss of power of the muscles acting around right knee joint. Considering the pain and agony undergone by the appellant, I am inclined to enhance the amount under the head pain and suffering. The Tribunal, in the absence of producing any documentary evidence in support of the income proof, has taken the notional income at Rs.6,000/- per month. The accident is of the year 2010. Considering the age of the appellant and the number of dependents the notional income should have taken on a little higher side. If that is taken, there shall be an increase in the loss of future income and under the head loss of income during laid up period. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/- for future medical expenses. Considering the cost factor and the fact that the appellant has to undergo one more surgery for removal of implants, the amount awarded under the said head is also meagre. Similarly, the amount awarded, all put together, under the head loss of amenities, loss of teeth, conveyance, food and nourishment, attendant charges at RS.15,000/- is also lower in side and the same also require enhancement. Be that as it may, instead of awarding amounts under different heads, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, in my considered opinion, awarding additional amount of Rs.93,000/- globally would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, it is awarded. The enhanced compensation shall not carry any interest.
In the result, appeal is allowed in part Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE lnn