IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019 BEFORE:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD NAWAZ M.F.A. NO.6001 OF 2014 [MV] BETWEEN MANJUNATHA KHARVI, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, S/O. DURGA, R/O. KELAMANE, OLGA MANTAPA, UPPUNDA VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK. ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. H. PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND 1. MOHAMMED ARSHAQ, AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS, S/O. SULEMAN, R/O. H.NO.175 A, JANATHA COLONY, BEEJADI VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK-576 201.
2. UNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL INS. CO. LTD, REGISTERED AND CORPORATE OFFICE, UNIT 401, 4TH FLOOR, SANGAM COMPLEX, 127 HANDERI, KURLA HANDERI EAST, MUMBAI-400 059.
REP BY AUTHORISED OFFICER.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. RAVI S. SAMPRATHI, ADVOCATE FOR R-2, R-1 SERVICE OF NOTICE IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 21.01.2015) THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 15.07.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.418/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MEMBER, MACT, KUNDAPURA, 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:
JUDGMENT Though this appeal is listed for admission, the same is taken up for final disposal at the consent of both the learned counsel.
Being aggrieved by the inadequacy of the compensation awarded by the Tribunal in MVC No.418/2013, the claimant has preferred this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and the learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2/Insurance Company.
3. The case of the claimant is that on 13.03.2013 at about 8.30 p.m., when he was walking on the left side of the Municipal Road from Shastri Circle to Parijatha Circle and when he reached near Shet Building, the rider of the motor cycle bearing registration No.KA-20-EC-7394 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against him. On account of which, he fell down and sustained grievous injuries.
4. Before the Tribunal, the appellant got himself examined as PW1 and the doctor as PW-2, Exs.P-1 to P-12 were got marked as documents. On behalf of the respondent Ex.R1 – policy of the insurance was marked.
5. The Tribunal after considering the oral and documentary evidence on record, awarded a total compensation of Rs.69,250/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit and held that the Respondents No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that though the appellant has sustained permanent disability, however the Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of future income on account of the said disability. Further, the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards ‘food, nourishment and attendant charges’ and he further submits that the compensation awarded under all other heads are on the lower side and accordingly he seeks to allow the appeal by modifying the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
7. Per contra, the learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance Company would justify the award passed by the Tribunal and submits that the same is just and reasonable and accordingly, seeks to dismiss the appeal.
8. According to the appellant, he was aged about 29 years, working as a coolie and earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month. Except the oral testimony, there is no acceptable and reliable evidence to hold that the appellant was earning a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month. The Tribunal has taken the income of the appellant at Rs.5,000/- per month, which is on the lower side. Considering the fact that the accident is of the year 2013, I deem it appropriate to take the notional income of the appellant at Rs.8,000/- per month.
9. The doctor – PW2 who is an orthopedic surgeon has deposed that the appellant has suffered disability of 10% to the right upper limb. According to Ex.P3 wound certificate, there is dislocation of the shoulder. The appellant was admitted to Chinmayi Hospital and he was an in-patient from 13.03.2013 to 20.03.2013. Ex.P.10 is the disability certificate. According to the same, the total disability in the left upper limb is permanent and partial upto 10%. Considering the said evidence, it can be safely held that the appellant has sustained disability to the extent of 3% to the whole body. The appellant was aged about 29 years, the appropriate multiplier to his age is ‘17’ and therefore, the appellant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.48,960/- (Rs.8,000x12x17x3/100) towards ‘loss of income on account of disability’.
10. The loss of earning during laid up period is enhanced from Rs.15,000/- to Rs.24,000/-. A sum of Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards ‘food, nourishment and attendant charges’. The compensation awarded under all other heads are just and reasonable. Therefore the appellant-claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.1,37,210/- as against Rs.69,250/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit. Accordingly, I pass the following :
ORDER The appeal is partly allowed.
The impugned judgment and award dated 15.07.2014 passed in MVC No.418/2013 by the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Kundapura is hereby modified.
The appellant-claimant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.1,37,210/- as against Rs.69,250/- awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization.
The respondent No.2/Insurance Company shall deposit the entire compensation amount within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of this judgment.
Sd/- JUDGE Snc