IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR M.F.A.NO.8762 OF 2017(MV-I) BETWEEN MAHESH.M S/O MADANNA, 24 YEARS R/O MALLESHWARA SWAMY TEMPLE STREET MADHUGIRI TOWN – 572 132.
TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
(BY SRI.PATEL D.KAREGOWDA, ADVOCATE) AND 1. JAGADEESH G.R S/O RANGAIAH, 28 YEARS R/O GIREGOWDANAHALLI – 572 132 DODDERI HOBLI MADHUGIRI TALUK TUMAKURU DISTRICT.
2. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., KASTURI MANSION M.G.ROAD, BEHIND KRISHNA TALKIES ABOVE CORPORATION BANK TUMAKURU – 572 101.
BY ITS MANAGER.
…APPELLANT …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JANARDHAN REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R-2 R-1 SERVED) THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 29.07.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO. 448/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & MACT-XIII, MADHUGIRI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ETC.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This appeal has been filed by the claimant challenging the impugned judgment and award dated 29.07.2017 passed by the learned Addl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT-XIII, Madhugiri (for short ‘the Tribunal’), in M.V.C.No.448/2016, awarding a sum of Rs.5,70,600/- together with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till date of deposit towards the injuries sustained by the claimant-appellant in a road traffic accident that occurred on 05.03.2016.
2. Though the matter is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal.
3. Both the counsels submit that the occurrence of accident as well as the coverage of the policy of the offending vehicle by the Insurance company are not in dispute and this appeal is restricted to quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal committed an error in taking the notional income of the claimant as Rs.6,000/- per month instead of Rs.9,500/- per month as per the Lok Adalat guidelines. He also contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other conventional heads is on the lower side.
5. The learned counsel for the respondent-Insurance company would support the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
6. I have given my careful consideration to the rival submissions and perused the material on record.
7. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellant, the Tribunal failed to consider and appreciate the Lok Adalat guidelines which stipulate that in respect of an accident that occurred in the year 2016, the notional income should be taken as Rs.9,500/- per month. The appellant has incurred 15% disability to the whole body as per the evidence of the doctor. Hence, taking the notional income as Rs.9,500/- per month, the appellant would be entitled to total sum of Rs.2,90,700/- (Rs.9,500/- x 12 x 17 x 15/100) towards ‘loss of future income’. Since the Tribunal has already awarded compensation of Rs.1,83,600/-, the appellant would be entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,07,100/- under this head.
8. Consequent upon taking notional income as Rs.9,500/- as the accident is of the year 2016, the appellant would be entitled to an additional sum of Rs.16,500/- (Rs.28,500/- - Rs.12,000/-) under the head ‘loss of income during laid up period’.
9. Thus, in all, the appellant is entitled to an additional enhanced compensation of Rs.1,23,600/- under the following heads:-
1 Future loss of income Rs.1,07,100/-
2 loss of income during laid up period Rs.16,500/-
Total Rs.1,23,600/-
10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I pass the following order:-
(i) The appeal is partly allowed.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 29.07.2017 passed by the learned Addl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT-XIII, Madhugiri in M.V.C.No.448/2016 is hereby modified.
(iii) The appellant-claimant is entitled to additional enhanced compensation of Rs.1,23,600/- which shall carry interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of deposit.
(iv) The apportionment and disbursement to be done as per the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
bnv Sd/- JUDGE