IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT M.F.A.No.7683/2010 (MV) BETWEEN:
MISS. DEEPTI D/O MANAPPA AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R/O KAMMARAKODIGE HEGGOGU POST THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT.
(BY SRI. PRAKASH HEGDE K, ADV.) AND:
1. RAGHU KUMAR S/O S.M.LINGAPPA MAJOR WORKING AS LINEMEN IN MESCOM SOPPUGUDDE THIRTHAHALLI TALUK SHIMOGA DISTRICT.
2. THE BRANCH MANAGER HDFC CHEBBE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, 5TH FLOOR EXPRESS TOWER, NARIMAN POINT MUMBAI 400 021 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI. O MAHESH, ADV. FOR R2 R1-SERVED & UNREPRESENTED) ... RESPONDENTS THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:04.03.2010 PASSED IN MVC NO.244/05 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, ADDITIONAL MACT, SHIMOGA, 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 The claimant/injured is before this Court in appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded under the judgment and award dated 04.03.2010 in MVC No.244/2005 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shimoga (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’ for short).
2. The claimant, aged about 17 years as on the date of accident, filed a claim petition represented by guardian her mother, under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking compensation for the injuries suffered by her in a road traffic accident. It is stated that on 23.06.2004, when the injured was crossing the Koppa road, the rider of the bike bearing registration No.KA-14/Q-9519 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the claimant and she fell down and sustained injuries. She was taken to Jayachamarajendra Government Hospital, Thirthahalli and given treatment and later shifted to KMC Hospital, Manipal, wherein she took treatment as inpatient for a period of 21 days. It is also stated that she could not attend to school for five months.
3. Respondent No.2/Insurer filed objection denying the petition averments. It is contended that there was no negligence on the part of the first respondent rider of the offending motorcycle. It is stated that the liability would be subject to the rider of the motorcycle holding valid driving license as on the date of accident.
4. Mother of the injured was examined before the Tribunal as P.W.1 and also examined the doctor as P.W.2 and got marked the documents as Ex.P1 to Ex.P13. However, the respondents have not examined any witnesses nor marked any documents.
5. The Tribunal, on examination of the material on record both oral and documentary, awarded total compensation of Rs.91,312/- which was rounded off to Rs.91,350/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., under the following heads:
Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant is before this Court in this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents/insurance company.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the claimant who was aged about 17 years as on the date of accident suffered injuries and the doctor-P.W.2 in his evidence has stated that the injured has suffered 5% permanent physical impairment of left upper extremity and 5% functional impairment of left lower extremity. He submits that the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under the head loss of amenities of life. Learned counsel further submits that the Tribunal has not appreciated the evidence of P.W.2-Doctor while determining the compensation.
8. Learned counsel for Respondent No.2/Insurance Company submits that the Tribunal has awarded just and reasonable compensation looking into the injuries suffered by the claimant which needs no interference.
9. The accident occurred on 26.03.2004 involving the claimant and the motorbike bearing registration No.KA-14/Q-
9519 is not in dispute. The claimant suffered injuries due to the accident and she was treated initially at Jayachamarajendra Hospital at Thirthahalli and subsequently she was shifted to KMC Hospital at Manipal, wherein she was inpatient for 21 days. The doctor/P.W.2 examined in support of the claimant’s case has stated in his evidence that the claimant has suffered 5% functional impairment of left lower extremity. He also stated that the fracture suffered by the injured has been re-united and there is no difficulty for the petitioner to do her daily work. He has further stated that the claimant will get pain while lifting the weight and walking for a long time.
10. Looking into the injuries suffered by the claimant and also material on record and taking into consideration the evidence of doctor, I am of the opinion that the claimant/appellant would be entitled for enhanced compensation. Further it is noticed that the Tribunal has not awarded any compensation under the head loss of amenities.
Taking into consideration the overall facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to award global compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the claimant/injured. Thus, in addition to the compensation of Rs.91,350/- awarded by the Tribunal, the claimant/injured would be entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.50,000/- with interest as awarded by the Tribunal.
11. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and award dated 04.03.2010 passed in MVC No.244/2005 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Shimoga is modified and the claimant is entitled to enhanced global compensation of Rs.50,000/- in addition to the compensation of Rs.91,350/-, along with interest as awarded by the Tribunal.
mpk/-* CT:bms SD/- JUDGE