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 FIRST APPEAL NO.4856 OF 2016 (MV) BETWEEN:
MASTER MANOJ KUMAR K @ MANOJ S/O KODANDA RAMA, AGED ABOUT 17 YEARS, R/AT NO.4,5TH D CROSS, ABBAIAH REDDY LAYOUT, KAGGADASAPURA, C.V.RAMAN NAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 093 MINOR, REPRESENTED BY MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN SMT.SUMATHI W/O KODANDA RAMA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS ... APPELLANT (BY SMT:BHUSHANI KUMAR, ADV.) AND:
1. SRI.KODANDA S/O S.JAGANNATHAN, MAJOR IN AGE R/AT NO.35, 3RD MAIN, NAGAPPA REDDY LAYOUT, KAGGADASAPURA, C.V.RAMAN NAGAR, BANGALORE – 560 093 2. IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED SRI.SHANTHI TOWERS, 5TH FLOOR, 3RD MAIN, NO.141, EAST NGEF LAYOUT, KASTHURINAGAR, BANGALORE EAST, REP BY:ITS BRANCH MANAGER ...RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.E I SANMATHI, ADV. FOR R2;
NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DTD:28.03.219) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:01.03.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.528/15 ON THE FILE OF THE 9TH ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & 34TH ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-7, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T There is a delay of nineteen days in filing this appeal. IA.I of 2016 is filed seeking condonation of delay. Accepting the reason shown in the affidavit filed in support of the application IA.I of 2016 is allowed. Delay of nineteen days cased in filing the appeal is condoned. Notice to respondent No.1 dispensed with. Submission accepted.
2. For the accidental injuries suffered in the road traffic accident that took place on 05th September 2015, the injured made claim petition before the IX Additional Small Causes and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore. The Tribunal, by its judgment and award dated 01st March, 2016 passed in MVC No.528 of 2019 awarded compensation of Rs.2,80,492/- with interest at 8% per annum. Being not satisfied with the compensation awarded, the appellant is before this Court in this appeal.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under all heads is very meagre. Hence, she prays for allowing the appeal and to enhance the compensation suitably.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent- Insurer supports the order of the Tribunal and submits to dismiss the appeal.
5. Accident is not in dispute. In the accident the appellant has suffered fracture of femur and communited fracture of left tibia and CRIF with IL nail. The injuries suffered by the appellant are grievous in nature. It is submitted that the appellant was pursuing I PUC at the time of accident and because of the injuries suffered in the accident, he could not pursue studies and lost one academic year. It has come in the evidence that the appellant was an inpatient for seven days and the Doctor has opined that the appellant has suffered disability at 8% to the whole body. It is also the opinion of the doctor that the appellant has to undergo one more surgery for removal of implants. When the Doctor has stated that the injured has suffered disability to the extent of 8% to the whole body, the Tribunal should have awarded some amount under the head disability. Not awarding any amount under the said head is erroneous. In that view of the matter, This Court is of the opinion to awarded compensation under the head Disability. To award the compensation, the income of the appellant is to be calculated. Considering the year of accident and the fact that the appellant was a student, notional income is taken at Rs.3,000/-. Since the appellant was aged 16 years at the time of accident, the multiplier would be 18. Hence, the calculation would be Rs.3,000/- x 12 x 18 x 8% comes to Rs.51,840/-. The same is awarded under the head disability. In the facts and circumstances of the case, a amount of Rs.5,000/- under the head of loss of curriculum; Rs.10,000/- is awarded under the heads towards pain and suffering and Rs.10,000/- towards attendant, conveyance and nourishment respectively.
Accordingly the enhanced compensation would be Rs.76,840/-. Further, instead of awarding interest to the enhanced amount, I am of the opinion that suffice it would if a global amount of Rs.95,000/- is awarded in the interests of justice. Accordingly, Rs.95,000/- global compensation 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