IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE NATARAJ RANGASWAMY M.F.A.NO.2929/2013(MV-D) BETWEEN MANAGER-LEGAL ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., # 89, II FLOOR, S V R COMPLEX HOSUR MAIN ROAD MADIVALA, BANGALORE-560 068 ALSO ZENITH HOUSE KESHAVRAO KHADE MARG, MAHALAXMI, MUMBAI-400 034 MAHARASHTRA STATE ...APPELLANT (BY SRI A.N.KRISHNASWAMY, ADVOCATE) AND 1. BHAGWAT SINGH BOLIA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS 1(a) SMT BHAGWATI BOLIA W/O LATE BHAGWAT SINGH BOLIA NOW AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS 1(b) B PRIYANK BOLIA S/O LATE BHAGWAT SINGH BOLIA AGE MAJOR 1(c) B ASHINI BOLIA D/O LATE BHAGWAT SINGH BOLIA AGE MAJOR R/A # 41, GROUND FLOOR, 12TH MAIN ROAD, BTM LAYOUT, I STAGE, OPP. WATER TANK BANGALORE ALSO AT NO.404, VARDHAMAN APARTMENT BHOPALPURA UDAIPUR-313001 2. MANAGING DIRECTOR KARNATAKA STATE TOURISM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., HAVING ITS OFFICE AT # 49, WEST ENTRANCE, KHANIJA BHAVAN II FLOOR, RACE COURSE ROAD BANGALORE-560 001 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI S.V.ANGADI, ADVOCATE FOR R1(a), R1(b) & R1(c) SRI B.S.SHRINIVAS, FOR SRI B.L.SANJEEV, ADVOCATES FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 07.01.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.6805/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE 22ND ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT, BANGALORE AWARDING A COMPENSATION OF RS.15,70,280/- WITH INTEREST @6% P.A FOR RS.7,20,280/- (EXCLUDING MEDICAL EXPENSES OF RS.8,50,000/-) FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL DEPOSIT.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, SATYANARAYANA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT The 2nd respondent-Insurer in MVC No.6805/2011 on the file of the XXII Additional Small Causes Judge and Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short ‘Tribunal’), Bengaluru, has come up in this appeal impugning the quantum of compensation awarded for the death of Bhagwat Singh Bolia, who was the claimant before the Tribunal in MVC No.6805/2011.
2. The brief facts leading to this appeal are that the claimant-Bhagwat Singh Bolia along with his wife and two children intended to go for one day trip on 01.10.2011 to Belur, Halebidu and Shravanabelagola conducted by 1st respondent-Karnataka State Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. (for short ‘KSTDC Ltd.) Initially, the claimant had purchased E ticket to travel in BJS C6-Volvo Bus. Since the number of passengers traveling were not sufficient to fill the Bus, which was designated for the said trip, the 1st respondent-KSTDC Ltd., organized the trip by engaging Swaraj Maxi Cab with limited number of passengers available for the said trip. It is stated that the said Swaraj Maxi Cab bearing Reg. No.KA-01-AA-5984 in which the claimants in MVC Nos.6804/2011 and 6805/2011 were traveling met with an accident near Yerur village, Kasaba Hobli, Kunigal Taluk, NH-48 at about 8.15 a.m. on the said date resulting in injuries to both the claimants in the said proceedings. It is in this background, two claim petitions were filed by one Bhagwat Singh Bolia seeking compensation for the injuries suffered by him in the accident and another by his wife Bhagwati Bolia, which were numbered as MVC Nos.6804/2011 and 6805/2011.
3. It is seen during pendency of the claim petition in MVC No.6805/2011 filed by the husband due to grievous injuries sustained by him initially he was shifted to Government Primary Health Hospital, Kunigal for treatment, later shifted to Nimhans Hospital, Bangalore, Fortis Hospital, Bangalore and for further treatment he was shifted to M/s.Aravali Hospital, Udaipur, where he succumbed to the injuries in the road traffic accident. Hence, the claim petition which was filed by the injured Bhagwat Singh Bolia in MVC No.6805/2011 was pursued by his widow and children. After getting the same amended, they sought compensation for the death of Bhagwat Singh Bolia, which was allowed in part by the Tribunal by judgment and award dated 07.01.2013 awarding compensation to his legal representatives in a sum of Rs.15,70,280/-, which is sought to be challenged in this appeal.
4. When this matter was listed on 25.12.2013, an order was passed for securing lower court records. It is in this background, this matter is listed today for admission along with the lower court records.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant-Insurer and perused the lower court records. On going through the same, it is seen that the medical report at Ex.P7 would indicate that the claimant in MVC No.6805/2011 has suffered grievous injuries to lumbar spine i.e., spinal joints resulting in paraspinal hematoma and fluid intensity of Cervical-6 and Cervical-7 and also Bone marrow oedema of the said spinal vertebraes resulting in widening and displacement between the aforesaid two spinal disk and also resulting in cord contusion and oedema at C-6 and C-7. Due to serious injuries to his spine he was completely bedridden. He was treated initially at Kunigal and various hospitals at Bengaluru and thereafter he went to Udaipur for further treatment where he succumbed to injuries on 24.01.2012 after three months ten days from the date of the accident. It is also seen during the said period when he was under treatment he was put on ventilator; that he was also not voluntarily taking any food; he underwent surgery and tracheal tube was put for feeding the injured.
6. It is in this background, the Tribunal on appreciation of the medical evidence available on record has taken note of huge medical expenses spent by the family, awarded a sum of Rs.8,50,000/- towards medical expenses and thereafter proceeded to award compensation to the claimants to a tune of Rs.15,70,280/-, which is as under:
7. Being aggrieved by the same, the respondent- Insurer in MVC No.6805/2011 has come up in this appeal urging various grounds. When the same is looked into, it is clearly seen that the appellant-insurer has not even bothered to look into the nature of injuries suffered by the original claimant-Bhagwat Singh Bolia, who subsequently succumbed to the injuries suffered in the accident and he has also not looked into the report of the Doctor, who has treated the injured. There is sufficient evidence produced by the claimants to demonstrate with reference to the nature of injuries suffered by the original claimant-Bhagwat Singh Bolia in MVC No.6805/2011 and also treatment he has undergone for a period of three months ten days before he succumbed to the injuries by not examining the doctors who have treated him. The report of the doctor at Ex.P7 would clearly indicate the nature of injuries suffered which led to the death of the original claimant in MVC No.6805/2011 subsequently pursued by his legal representatives for compensation for his death due to the injuries suffered in the said accident.
8. In this background, when the grounds urged in the appeal memo is looked into, no grounds are made out to entertain the appeal filed by the 1st respondent-Insurer and does not merit consideration. At this juncture, learned counsel for the appellant-Insurer would submit that the deceased-Bhagwat Singh Bolia was provided treatment with financial support given by TTK Health Care Services Pvt. Ltd. Though there is statement to that effect before the Tribunal and before this Court in this appeal, there is nothing on record to show what is the sum paid by the TTK Health Care Services Pvt. Ltd. towards reimbursement of medical expenses incurred to the deceased Bhagwat Singh Bolia and the extent of amount which is required to be deducted in this appeal is also not brought on record. In that view of the matter, the said ground urged is also without any basis and the same cannot be entertained.
9. The entire material available on record would clearly indicate that the appellant-Insurer when adduced evidence before the Tribunal as RW1 has not brought in all the aforesaid materials on record and neither in this appeal memo. Therefore, in the absence of any of these materials appearing in this appeal to consider the correctness or otherwise of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal for the death of the original claimant-Bhagwat Singh Bolia in MVC No.6805/2011 which was subsequently pursued by his legal representatives cannot be entertained. Accordingly, the same is dismissed.
In view of appeal being dismissed, the amount in deposit is ordered to be transferred to the Tribunal for disbursement to the claimants.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE TL