IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.N.SATYANARAYANA AND THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM M.F.A.5272/2012(MV-I) BETWEEN RAJA RATHNAKARA SHETTY AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS S/O LATE RAGHURAMA SHETTY R/O YEDERY, GUDDIMANE, KALTHODU POST KUNDAPURA TALUK ...APPELLANT (BY SRI H PAVANA CHANDRA SHETTY, ADVOCATE) AND 1. RAMESH ADIGA AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS S/O K ANANDA ADIGA R/O H NO.1-56A, GOLIBETTU, AIDORY, SASTHANA, UDUPI TALUK 2. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE, VISHNU PRAKASH BUILDING, COURT ROAD, UDUPI REP. BY ITS MANAGER …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI C SHANKARA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2, VIDE ORDER DATED 30.07.2014 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 29.02.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO.803/2008 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MEMBER, ADDITIONAL MACT, KUNDAPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, SATYANARAYANA J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT The claimant in MVC.No.803/2008 on the file of MACT, Kundapur, has come up in this appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded for the injuries suffered in a road traffic accident dated 12.4.2008.
2. Admittedly, the claimant was inmate of Maruti Omni bearing registration No.KA-20A-1718 belonging to 1st respondent who was also driver of the said vehicle. The accident is not in dispute. So also the injuries suffered by claimant in the said accident. The material on record would indicate that the claimant has suffered fracture of right tibia and fibula, which is the major injury and rest are minor injuries in the nature of cut and lacerated wounds which are two in number. In addition to that, there is reference to dislocation of knee joint which is subsequently set right.
3. The claimant would state that he was earning Rs.30,000/- p.m., prior to accident. Due to injuries suffered in the accident he was hospitalized for 14 days. Though the dislocation of knee joint is set right, there is shortening of 1 inch of his leg as well as wasting of 1 inch of muscle around the injure sight due to fracture of tibia and fibula. He would also state that there is restriction in the movement of knee as well as ankle to an extent of 20% and 30%.
4. It is seen that the Tribunal on appreciation of the material on record proceeded to award compensation to claimant in a sum of Rs.2,59,250/- payable with interest at 6% from the date of petition till date of realization. The said compensation is calculated under various heads which are for pain and suffering, loss of future income, loss of income during laid up period, medical expenses, loss of amenities and under other miscellaneous heads. Being not satisfied with the same, the claimant has come up in this appeal seeking enhancement.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant/claimant as well as learned counsel for respondent – insurer, who tried to assert that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal itself is liberal and on higher side, hence, prays for dismissal of the appeal.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the material on record, it is seen that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal appears to be more or less just and reasonable. However, in the fact situation, this Court is of the opinion that if another sum of Rs.25,000/- is globally awarded to the claimant, that would meet the ends of justice.
7. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the claimant in MVC.No.803/2008 on the file of MACT, Kundapur, is allowed in part awarding enhanced compensation of Rs.25,000/- with 6% p.a., from the date of claim petition till date of realization.
8. In view of the disposal of appeal in aforesaid manner, the registry is directed to return the LCR to the Tribunal at the earliest to enable the claimants to receive compensation which is deposited by the insurance company.
Sd/- JUDGE Sd/- JUDGE nd/-