IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.7493/2015 (MV) BETWEEN:
SRI CHANNEGOWDA S/O LATE DOLLEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/O MATADADODDI VILLAGE, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 430 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI.K P BHUVAN, ADV.) AND:
1. SRI KULLEGOWDA M C S/O CHANNEGOWDA, AGE: MAJOR, R/O MATADADODDI VILLAGE, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT – 571 430 2. SRI. SURENDRA M.M S/O MARIMADEGOWDA, AGE: MAJOR, R/O MATADADODDI VILLAGE, MADDUR TALUK, MANDYA DISTRICT - 571430 3. THE MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.1576, 1ST FLOOR, V.V. ROAD, MANDYA CITY – 571 401 4. THE MANAGER IFFCO - TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.486, NEAR KANTHARAJE URS ROAD, AKSHAYA BANDAR, KUVEMPUNAGAR, MYSORE 570 008 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SRIDHARA K, ADV. FOR R3; SRI.D.S.SRIDHARA , ADV. FOR R4 R1 & R2 ARE SERVED) THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:2.3.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.87/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MACT, MALAVALLI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
J U D G M E N T The appellant filed claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal at Malavalli seeking compensation for the injuries suffered in the road traffic accident that took place on 19th May 2010. The Tribunal, by its order dated 2nd March 2015, passed in MVC No.87 of 2010 awarded compensation of Rs.1,24,800/-. Being not satisfied with the compensation awarded, the appellant is before this Court in this appeal.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the claimant has suffered injury on his tenderness over lumboracel spine, compression of left knee, tenderness lift thigh distal third, fracture of femur left, and other minor injuries. He submits that though the Doctor has deposed that the claimant has suffered 30% disability, the Tribunal has taken it at 8%. The learned counsel further submits that though the claimant has stated that he was earning Rs.8,000/- per month, the Tribunal has taken the income at Rs.4,500/- per month which is on the lower side. Hence, he submits to enhance the compensation.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits to dismiss the appeal. He submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for interference from this Court.
4. As regards the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that the Tribunal has taken the income of the claimant at Rs.4,500/- per month as against the claimed income at Rs.8,000/- per month is concerned, this court normally assess the income of the claimant in the absence of production of proof of income taking into consideration the year of accident, place of residence, prevailing cost of living, price index, etc. In the present case, the accident is of the year 2010. For the accident of year 2010, this court assess notional income at Rs.6,000/- per month. Accordingly it is taken in the present case also. Hence, the calculation would be Rs.6,000/- x 12 x 15 x 8/100 which comes to Rs.86,400/-. The same is awarded under the head loss income on account of permanent disability as against Rs.64,800/- awarded by the Tribunal.
5. Under the head pain and suffering, in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal another Rs.5,000/- is awarded. Considering the injuries and the fact that the claimant has to undergo one more surgery for removal of implants, towards future medical expenses Rs.10,000/- is awarded in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,000/- towards food and nourishment. Considering the period of hospitalization, the amount awarded under the said head is enhanced by another Rs.5,000/-. The Tribunal has not awarded any income towards loss of income during laid up period. Taking the monthly income at Rs.6,000/- per month, an amount of Rs.18,000/- is awarded under the said head. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount towards loss of amenities.
Considering the agony and discomforts to be undergone by the claimant, an amount of Rs.10,000/- is awarded under the said head. Accordingly, it is ordered. Enhanced compensation carries interest at the rate as is awarded by the Tribunal.
In the result, appeal is allowed in part.
lnn Sd/- JUDGE