IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1463 OF 2019 (MV) BETWEEN:
MRS. SHEELA LOPIS W/O FRANCIS LOPIS AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS SRINAGARA, SAGARA TOWN SHIMOGGA DISTRICT-577401.
(BY SRI. PRUTHVI WODEYAR, ADV.) AND:
1. SRI. ALAN DAYAS S/O LATE BASTANV DAYAS AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS R/AT. SRINAGARA, SAGARA TOWN SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT-577401 DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE BEARING No.K.A. 15-M 7589 CAR.
2. DIVISIONAL MANAGER UNITED INDIAN INSURANCE CO. LTD., GOVIND KRUPA, J.C. ROAD SAGAR TOWN POLICE No.2404033116P111637030 VALID FROM TILL 4-12-2017.
- - -
… APPELLANT … RESPONDENTS This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act, against the judgment and award dated 23-11-2018 passed in MVC No.968/2017 on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Sagar, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation and etc.
This appeal coming on for Admission this day, the Court delivered the following:-
JUDGMENT Appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 23.11.2018 passed in MVC No.968/2017 by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and MACT wherein the claim petition came to be allowed in part and a compensation of `1,38,538/- was awarded.
2. In order to avoid overlapping and confusion, parties are addressed in accordance with the rankings held by them before the Tribunal.
3. The proceedings before the Tribunal came to be initiated because of a road traffic accident on 01.06.2017 at about 8 a.m. when the claimant was traveling with his aunt and younger sister and brother in a car bearing registration No.KA 15-M 7589 which was driven by respondent No.1 in a rash and negligent manner, because of which, it dashed against the tree.
In the process, the petitioner who was inside the car, sustained injuries. The petitioner filed the claim petition claiming compensation.
4. The learned Member, on considering the claims, contentions, accident, negligence and injuries and in his wisdom, granted compensation of `1,38,538/- together with interest under different heads. Against which, claimant has presented this appeal seeking enhancement. The injuries sustained by claimant the accident are stated to be comminuted fracture of distal metadiaphysis of radius and other injuries. The disability percentage is not mentioned.
5. The learned Member has assessed the medical expenditure at `60,827/-, compensation on pain and suffering at `30,000/- and loss of income during treatment at `12,000/-.
6. Learned counsel for the claimant submits that the future treatment and loss of amenities should have been assessed separately and seeks enhancement.
7. In the overall circumstances of the case, I find that the quantum of compensation granted by the learned Member is fair and just. There is no necessity of proceeding further. The appeal is rejected at this stage itself.
Sd/- JUDGE RV