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.9331 OF 2017 (MV) BETWEEN:
SMT.MEERA W/O KRISHNA MOORTHY AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/O SINDHURA, NEAR S.M.P.U. COLLEGE, 52, HEROOR VILLAGE, UDUPI TALUK, NOW RESIDING NEAR KAMADHENU, COCONUT FACTORY, KOTESHWARA.
... APPELLANT (BY SRI.NAGARAJA HEDGE, ADV.) AND:
1. SRI.ARUNA S/O DINAKARA, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/O AMMA NILAYA, KEERTHI NAGARA, KUKUDE, HONNALA POST, HARADI VILLAGE, BRAHMAVARA UDUPI DISTRICT.
2. IFFCO-TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE, MANGALORE - 575 001 REP. BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
(BY SRI.B.PRADEEP, ADV. FOR R2;
... RESPONDENTS NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DTD:28.03.2019) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:14.08.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.840/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, AND ADDL. MACT, UDUPI, (SITTING AT KUNDAPURA)., KUNDAPURA, 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 19 days in filing this appeal. IA.I of 2017 is filed seeking condonation of delay. Accepting the cause shown in the affidavit accompanying the application, IA.I of 2017 allowed. Delay of 19 days caused in filing the appeal condoned. Submission accepted. Notice to Respondent No.1 dispensed with.
2. On 18th December 2014, the appellant while was walking from Udupi side to Brahmavara side on the left side of the road near SMS Church, NH-66, Varamballi, Brahmaravara a motor cycle bearing registration No.KA 20 EE 1892 belonging to the first respondent and ridden by himself in a rash and negligent manner came from Udupi side to Brahmavara side and dashed against the appellant the impact of which she sustained grievous injuries all over her body. Hence, she filed claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Udupi sitting at Kundapura. It was the case of the petitioner that prior to accident, she was hale and healthy and was earning an income of Rs.15,000/- per month doing tailoring work and now because of the accident, she suffered permanent disability and disfigured. The Tribunal, after considering the documentary and oral evidence adduced, has awarded a compensation of Rs.3,26,150/- with interest at 6% per annum on Rs.3,01,149/-. Being aggrieved by the compensation awarded, the appellant is before this court seeking enhancement in compensation.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has erred in not awarding just compensation. The amount awarded under the head pain and suffering is meagre. Though it was claimed in the claim petition that the appellant was earning Rs.15,000/- per month doing tailoring work, the same is disbelieved and the amount of Rs.7,000/- is taken as monthly income, which according to him, is an error. He also submits that the compensation awarded under other heads viz. conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges; as also has not awarded any amount towards loss of amenities. Hence, he prays to allow the petition by enhancing the compensation suitably.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent-insurance company supports the award and submits to dismiss the appeal. He submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and the same does not call for interference in this appeal.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the judgment and award. Accident is not in dispute and the injuries suffered in the accident is also not in dispute. In the accident, the appellant has suffered abrasion above the upper lip, abrasion by the side of lateral right eye, fracture of left humerus, left side VII, VIII rib fractures. The doctor has opined that the fracture of left humerus and left side VII, VIII rib fractures are grievous in nature. Considering the evidence, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.50,000/- towards pain and suffering. The same is just and proper. As regards loss of future earnings is concerned, the learned counsel submits that the appellant was doing tailoring work and was earning Rs.15,000/- per month. Disbelieving the same, the Tribunal has taken the monthly income of the appellant at Rs.7,000/- per month. Though the Tribunal has taken note of the Gazette Notification published on 31st May 2010 from the date of Ministry of Labour and Employment, to the effect that, for the purpose of arriving at a monthly wages, with effect from the date of publication of the said notification the same would be Rs.8,000/- but has taken the income of the appellant at Rs.7,000/- per month. The accident is of the year 2014. With relevance to the accident of 2014, this Court consistently assess the income at Rs.8,500/- per month and the same is taken in the present case also. Accordingly, the calculation would be Rs.8,500/- x 12 x 13 x 12/100 = Rs.1,59,120/-. The same is awarded as against Rs.98,280/- awarded by the Tribunal. As regards loss of income during the treatment period, considering the nature of injury suffered by the appellant, and considering that the appellant would have lost income during the treatment period, an amount of Rs.25,500/- is awarded under the head loss of earning during treatment including what has been awarded by the Tribunal. As regards future medical expenses is concerned, the Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.25,000/-. Considering the cost factor, an additional amount of Rs.15,000/- is awarded under the said head. Further, another amount of Rs.5,000/- is awarded towards conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges. In total, the compensation would be Rs.4,29,460/- as against Rs.3,26,149/- awarded by the Tribunal. The enhanced amount shall also carry interest.
Appeal is allowed in part.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE lnn