IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. SUDHINDRARAO M.F.A.No.4950/2019(MV) BETWEEN:
THE MANAGER ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, S.S. COMPLEX, SUBASH CHOWKA, HASSAN-573 201.
BY ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, No.144, No.44/45, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX, RESIDENCY CROSS ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 025.
BY ITS MANAGER. ...APPELLANT (BY SRI O MAHESH, ADVOCATE) AND:
1 . BOREGOWDA @ ANNAYYAPPA S/O DEVEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, JUNJANAHALLI VILLAGE, SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT-573 201.
2 . THIMMEGOWDA S/O HONNEGOWDA JANIVARA, KUPPALLI POST, HASSAN TALUK AND DISTRICT-573 201. …RESPONDENTS THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173 (1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.04.2019 PASSED IN MVC No.1590/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE & ADDITIONAL MACT, HASAN AWARDING COMPENSATION OF Rs.1,53,000/- WITH INTEREST AT 6% P.A. FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF REALISATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Though the matter is listed for Admission, having regard to the nature and circumstances of the case, the same is taken up for final disposal.
The appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 9.4.2019 passed in MVC No.1590/2011 by the II Additional District and Sessions Judge and Additional MACT, Hassan, wherein, the petition came to be allowed in part and an amount of Rs.1,53,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization and directing the insurance company to deposit the same.
2. In order to avoid confusion and overlapping, the parties herein are referred to with their rankings as held by them before the Tribunal.
3. The details of the road traffic accident is as under:
On 31.8.2011 at about 1.00 p.m. the petitioner was proceeding on bike bearing Reg.No.KA.14.S.0839 as pillion rider which was ridden by his son in law Raghu. When they reached near Rajiv College, Bommanayakanahalli outer ring road, the driver of the lorry bearing No.KA.13.B.5314 drove the same in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the bike on its hind side. Due to which, petitioner sustained grievous injuries all over the body. Immediately, he was shifted to S.C. Hospital, Hassan, where he has undergone surgery and took treatment as inpatient for 15 days and he has spent Rs.50,000/- towards medical expenses.
4. It is stated that, prior to accident, he was hale and healthy and getting income of Rs.15,000/- by doing agriculture and also cattle business. Due to the injuries, he suffered permanent disability.
5. The insurance company resisted the claim petition contending that the alleged accident was due to negligence of the rider of motor cycle and it is not liable to pay compensation.
6. The learned member adjudicated the matter on the basis of the oral evidence of PWs 1 and 2, and RW1 and documentary evidence of Exs.P1 to P14 and Ex.R1 and R2, allowed the claim petition in part and awarded the compensation as mentioned above. Being aggrieved by the same, the Insurance Company has presented this appeal.
7. Sri. O. Mahesh, learned counsel for appellant Insurance Company would submit that the percentage of disability on account of injuries if any sustained by the claimant admittedly at 6% may not have impact in reducing the working or earning capacity of the claimant. On the other hand, the same has been raised in order to get swelling in compensation amount. The accident is not disputed. The other factors regarding liability is not in dispute. What is objected by learned counsel for appellant is the quantum of compensation, more particularly, towards the loss of future earning, which I find is an objection taken for the sake of taking objection.
8. In the circumstances, considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant as per wound certificate Ex.P9 which are four in number and the Doctor has assessed the disability at 17% to the left upper limb and 6% to the whole body, I do not find it is exorbitant or unreasonable. I find the compensation of Rs.1,53,000/- awarded by the learned Member under different heads is just and proper and it does not call for any reduction and it is confirmed and the appeal does not deserves to be continued further. Accordingly, appeal is rejected.
The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the jurisdictional Tribunal, forthwith.
Sd/- JUDGE tsn*