IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT M.F.A.NO.3517 OF 2012 (MV) BETWEEN:
Sri. M.N. Nagabhushan S/o. Late Nagappa Aged about 73 years Agriculturist Residing at Settyhally Village Kasaba Hobli Madhugiri Taluk Tumkur District. ... Appellant (By Sri. M.N. Madhusudhan, Advocate) AND:
1. TATA AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd., 5th Floor, West Entrance Khanija Bhavan Race Course Road Bengaluru – 560 001 2. Sri. S. Mohan S/o. Shankaran Kutty Aged about 50 years R/at No.1745 Adira Prashanth Nagar T. Dasarahalli Bengaluru – 560 057 ... Respondents (By Sri. O. Mahesh, Advocate for R1; R2 – served, unrepresented) This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act against the Judgment and Award dated 18.04.2011 passed in MVC No.2768/2009 on the file of the I Additional Small Cause Judge, MACT, 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 The claimant-injured is before this Court in this appeal, not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded under the judgment and award dated 18.04.2011 in M.V.C.No.2768/2009 on the file of the I Additional Small Cause Judge & MACT, Bengaluru.
2. The claimant filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, claiming compensation for the injuries sustained in a road traffic accident that occurred on 02.12.2008. It is stated that on 02.12.2008 at 11.00 a.m., the claimant was proceeding in a car bearing registration No.KA-41-M-3873, Scorpio bearing registration No.KA-04-MD-513 came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed to the car causing him injuries.
3. On issuance of notice, respondent No.1- Insurance Company appeared before the Tribunal and filed its statement denying the petition averments. It is also stated that the claimant was also contributed to the occurrence of the accident.
4. The claimant examined himself as PW.1 and got marked Exs.P1 to P9 and the Doctor was examined as PW.2 and got marked Ex.P10. The Tribunal on assessing material on record, awarded total global compensation of Rs.10,000/- to the claimant with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.
5. The claimant not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is before this Court in this appeal.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for respondent No.1-Insurance Company. Perused the lower court records.
7. The accident occurred on 02.12.2008 at about 11.00 a.m., involving vehicles bearing Registration No.KA-41-M-3873 and KA-04-MD-513 and the accidental injuries suffered by the claimant is not in dispute in this appeal.
8. The claimant has produced Ex.P1 - Wound certificate issued by R.C.Hospital, Rajarajeshwarinagar, Bengaluru. The following are the injuries suffered by the claimant:-
“Sutured wound over the left occipital region Abrasions healed over right forehead Inability to move his left arm X-ray of left arm shows fractured left humerus with implant failure”
The wound certificate notes that the injuries are grievous in nature. Ex.P.2 is the discharge summary, which indicates that the claimant was inpatient from 28.01.2009 to 10.02.2009. PW.2 is the Doctor, who treated the claimant. In his evidence, PW.2 has stated that prior to the accident itself the implants were existing in the body of the claimant. Immediately on occurrence of accident, the claimant had taken treatment at Government Hospital, Dabaspet but no document or medical certificates are produced to that effect.
9. Looking into the injuries suffered by the claimant and as he was inpatient for more than 10 days as per Ex.P2 discharge summary the global compensation of Rs.10,000/- awarded by Tribunal is on the lower side. Since the claimant was aged about 70 years as on the date of accident and looking into the nature of injuries suffered and as he was inpatient from 28.01.2009 to 10.02.2009, justice would be met, if a sum of Rs.25,000/- global compensation is awarded to the claimant.
Thus, the global compensation of Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs.25,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum, as awarded by the Tribunal.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part.
Sd/- JUDGE KG