IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 5TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.SREENIVASE GOWDA M.F.A NO.5656/2010 (MV) BETWEEN:
SRI. N.M.SIDDESH S/O SHIVAMURTHAIAH AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS R/O NO.5/26 NEAR KALIKA DEVI TEMPLE OPP. CHANDRU GARMENTS DAVANAGERE.
(BY SRI. M. NAGARAJA, ADV.,) AND:
1. SRI. H.MAHADEVAPPA S/O HUCHEGOWDA AGE 35 YEARS, DRIVER R/O LINGARAYANADODDI CHANNAPATTANA TALUK RAMANAGARAM DISTRICT (OLD BANGALORE RURAL) 2. SRI. NAGARAJ S/O CHANNABASAVAGOWDA AGE: MAJOR R/O NO.16/1, 1ST CROSS A.V.ROAD, K.S.N. BUS STAND BANGALORE 3. THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., DIVISIONAL OFFICE OPP. DENTAL COLLEGE ...APPELLANT VIDYANAGARA ROAD DAVANAGERE (AMENDED AS PER COURT ORDER DATED 04.12.2017) 4. THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER K.S.R.T.C., DAVANAGERE DIVISION DAVANAGERE 5. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR/CHAIRMAN INTERNAL SECURITY FUND K.S.R.T.C., K.H. ROAD BANGALORE ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. O. MAHESH, ADVOCATE FOR R3;
NOTICE TO R1, R2, R4 AND R5 DISPENSED WITH) THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:10.10.2008 PASSED IN MVC NO.996/2006 ON THE FILE OF ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, FAST TRACK COURT – 1, DAVANAGERE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT This appeal is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
2. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, appeal is heard and disposed of finally.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as they are referred to in the claim petition before the Tribunal.
4. As there is no dispute regarding certain injuries sustained by the claimant in a road traffic accident occurred on 30.3.2006 due to rash and negligent driving of Rakesh Tourist bus bearing Registration No.KA-20-C-7577 by its driver and liability of the insurer of the said vehicle; the point that arises for consideration in this appeal is:
Whether the quantum of compensation of awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable or does it call for enhancement?
5. As per Ex.P5 - Wound Certificate, claimant had sustained following injuries:
i) left forearm in POP all ready.
ii) C/o – Tenderness in right inguinal regional iii) X-ray No.3394 left forearm; fracture on lower end of left radius 6. The injuries sustained and treatment underwent by the claimant are also evident from Wound Certificate Ex.P-5, disability certificate Ex.P7, X-ray Ex.P8 and medical bills Exs.P9 to 15 and corroborated by oral evidence of the claimant and doctors, who were examined as PWs-1, 2 and 3 respectively. PW.3 – Dr.Mallikarjuna Reddy has deposed that claimant has sustained the aforesaid injuries and has suffered permanent disability of 15% to 20% to the left wrist.
7. Considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant, a sum of `25,000/- is awarded towards pain and suffering as against `5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
8. Claimant has produced the medical bills for `1,500/-. He was treated conservatively by applying POP. Therefore, a sum of `2,000/- is awarded towards medical and incidental expenses as against `1,500/- awarded by the Tribunal.
9. The claimant claims to have been doing banana business and earning a sum of `4,000/- per month, but the same is not established by producing any documents. In the absence of proof of income, considering his age as 25 years, year of accident as 2006 and his avocation as banana business, his income could be assessed at `3,500/- per month as against `3,000/- per month assessed by the Tribunal. The nature of injuries suggest that he must have been under rest and treatment for a period of 2 months and therefore a sum of `7,000/- is awarded towards ‘loss of income during laid up period’ as against `3,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
10. The claimant is aged about 25 years at the time of accident and the multiplier applicable to his age group is ‘18’. His income is assessed at `3,500/- per month. PW-3, doctor in his evidence has stated that claimant has suffered disability of 15% to 20% to the left wrist. Considering the nature of injuries, the Tribunal was justified in taking the disability at 6% while working out the ‘loss of future income’. Therefore, ‘loss of future income works out to `45,360/- (3,500 x 12 x 18 x 6/100) and it is awarded as against `36,720/- awarded by the Tribunal.
11. Considering the disability stated by the doctor and an amount of discomfort and unhappiness the claimant has to undergo in his future life, a sum of `10,000/- is awarded towards ‘loss of amenities’ as against `5,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.
12. Thus, the claimant is entitled for the following compensation:-
13. Accordingly, the following order is passed:
ORDER a) Appeal is allowed in part. The judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified to the extent stated hereinabove.
b) The claimant is entitled for an additional compensation of `38,140/- with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till the date of realization but excluding interest for the delayed period of 540 days in filing the appeal.
d) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the additional compensation with interest within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. The same is ordered to be released in favour of the claimant.
No order as to costs.
Sd/- JUDGE BS