IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 02ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.SUDHINDRARAO M.F.A.No.8596 OF 2016 (MV) Between:
Shivanna V C S/o Late Chikka Thimmegowda Now aged about 66 years R/at No.1, S.Hosur Gurugadahalli Post Kasaba Hobli, Tiptur Rural Tumakuru – 572 201 …Appellant (By Smt. Kamala D K, Advocate) And:
1. The Regional Manager ICICI Lombard Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd., No.89, 2nd Floor, SVR Complex Hosur Main Road, Madiwala Bengaluru – 560 068 2. Mr. Bhaskar Kulal M S/o Soora Kulal No.24/1, 6th Cross Saraswathipura Nandini Layout Bengaluru – 560 096 …Respondents (By Sri H.C. Vrushabendraiah, Adv. for R-1 & Notice to respondent No.2 dispensed with) This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of the MV Act against the judgment and award dated 21.01.2016 passed in MVC No.979/2015 on the file of the 1st Additional Small Causes Judge & 27th ACMM, Bengaluru, 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 Though this matter is listed for admission, with the consent of the counsel appearing for both the sides, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and award passed by the learned Member, MACT, SSCH-11, Bengaluru, on 21.01.2016 in MVC No.979/2015 filed by appellant herein, which came to be allowed in part, wherein the claimant was awarded an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- together with interest @ 6% per annum, from the date of petition, till realization from respondent No.1.
3. In order to avoid confusion and overlapping, the parties, hereinafter, are referred in accordance to their respective rankings held before the Tribunal.
4. The incident that gave rise to initiate proceedings before the Tribunal is said to be an accident occurred on 20.12.2014 at about 03.45pm. The petitioner was walking on the left side of footpath on NH-206 road, near Vijaya Bank, Tiptur Town, Tumakuru and he was said to be in compliance of traffic rules. By that time a car bearing Reg.No.KA-01/MD-5568 came from IB Circle in rash and negligent manner and dashed against the petitioner due to which he sustained injuries and fell down. He was said to have treated at Columbia Asia Hospital, Bengaluru from 20.12.2014 to 27.12.2014 and again from 04.01.2015 to 09.01.2015. He was further shifted to Sri Ranga Hospital, Tiptur and took treatment as inpatient from 10.01.2015 to 13.01.2015. He had to undergo massive treatment and has spent Rs.2,50,000/- and he also claims to be an agriculturist and earning Rs.12,000/- per month and due to impact of the accident, he lost his earning capacity and as against his claim of Rs.20,00,000/-, an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- granted by the tribunal.
5. In the circumstances, two witnesses examined as PW-1 and PW-2 i.e., the petitioner as PW-1 and doctor- R.Shashikanth as PW-2.
6. Learned counsel Smt. Kamala.D.K., for appellant would submit that though the injuries are not identifiable, it is a case of head injury and the petitioner has become very weak and he is not in a position to do any work for maintaining himself or his dependants. She would further emphasis that the compensation granted by the Tribunal is unreasonably low.
7. Learned counsel Sri H.C.Vrushabendraiah, for the insurer would submit that the doctor has not spoken about the percentage of disability to arrive at a figure irrespective of the income and avocation of the appellant. He would further submit that under the circumstances, though the amount granted on the higher side, the insurance company has considered the matter and has not preferred any appeal.
8. In the context and circumstances, the petitioner is said to be aged about 64 years and the injuries suffered by him are said to be head injury i.e., Traumatic Left Fronto Temporo Parietal Sub-dural hemorrhage and Traumatic subarachnoid hemorrhage. Even a head injury cannot be said to be an injury, where there are no identifiable disability, it has an effect causing impact on day to day life of the petitioner. In the circumstances, the global compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.2,50,000/- wherein Rs.1,95,000/- is stated to be medical expenses. In the background of the same, I find that the compensation under the head pain and sufferings and loss of amenities having pecuniary aspects have to be borne in mind.
9. Though I agree that it is an ideal case for granting compensation on global basis, which is adopted by the learned member of the Tribunal, I find the quantum of compensation is unreasonably low and it deserves enhancement of Rs.1,00,000/- considering the heads pain and sufferings, loss of amenities, resisting power and other heads. In the result, I find that the learned member erred in under assessing the disability and compensation. It should have been Rs.3,50,000/- as against Rs.2,50,000/-. Hence, the following:
O R D E R (a) The appeal is allowed in part.
(b) The judgment and award passed by the MACT (SCCH-11), Bengaluru, on 21.01.2016 in MVC No.979/2015 is modified by enhancing the compensation at Rs.3,50,000/- as against Rs.2,50,000/- with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.
(c) The respondent No.1/insurer shall deposit the award amount with interest within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
(d) Amount in deposit if any, shall be transmitted to the Tribunal, for disbursal.
Kmv* Sd/- JUDGE