Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Karnataka
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sri Ranjith Kumar G vs Sri Ajith Kumar K S And Others

High Court Of Karnataka|11 December, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR M.F.A.NO.5961 OF 2017 (MV - I) C/W M.F.A.NO.5131 OF 2017 IN M.F.A.NO.5961/2017 BETWEEN SRI.RANJITH KUMAR G., S/O V.GURUMURTHY REDDY, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/AT NO.47, 3RD CROSS, VENKATESHWARA LAYOUT, SOS POST, JAMBUSAVARI DINNE, OPP. BMTC DEPOT, J.P.NAGAR, 8TH PHASE, BANGALORE.
(BY SRI. SHRIPAD V SHASTRI, ADVOCATE) AND 1. SRI AJITH KUMAR K.S., NO.125/1, 9TH CROSS, OPP. CITY MEDICALS, BELLANDUR, BANGALORE - 103.
(OWNER OF CAR NO.KA-51-C-390) 2. NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., D.O.1, 3RD FLOOR, UNITY BUILDING, .APPELLANT ANNEX, NO.72, MISSION ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 027.
.RESPONDENTS (BY SMT.H.R.RENUKA, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:13.04.2017, PASSED IN MVC NO.990/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE X ADDITIONAL JUDGE, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, (SCCH - 16), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN M.F.A.NO.5131/2017 BETWEEN NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., D.O.1, 3RD FLOOR, UNITY BUILDING, ANNEX, NO.72, MISSION ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 027.
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER. (BY SMT.H.R.RENUKA, ADVOCATE) AND 1. SRI.RANJITH KUMAR G., S/O V.GURUMURTHY REDDY, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, R/AT NO.47, 3RD CROSS, VENKATESHWARA LAYOUT, SOS POST, JAMBUSAVARI DINNE, OPP. BMTC DEPOT, J.P.NAGAR, 8TH PHASE, BANGALORE.
.APPELLANT 2. AJITH KUMAR K.S., ADULT, NO.125/1, 9TH CROSS, OPP. CITY MEDICALS, BELLANDUR, BANGALORE - 560 103.
(OWNER OF CAR BEARING NO. KA-51-C-390).
.RESPONDENTS (R1 SERVED) THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:13.04.2017, PASSED IN MVC NO.990/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE X ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU (SCCH - 16), AN AWARD AMOUNT OF RS.4,58,286/- WITH INTEREST AT 9% P.A. (EXCLUDING FUTURE MEDICAL EXPENSES OF RS.15,000/-) FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
THESE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEALS COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT MFA No.5961/2017 is filed by the claimant challenging the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.990/2016, whereby the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.4,58,286/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realization.
2. MFA No.5131/2017 has been filed by the Insurance Company challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
3. Though the matters are listed for orders, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matters are taken up for final disposal.
4. MFA No.5131/2017 is filed by the appellant- Insurance Company on the ground that the driver of the offending vehicle do not possess the endorsement of the driving licence to drive heavy vehicle.
5. In so far as MFA No.5961/2018 is concerned, the learned counsel for the appellant- claimant submits that the Tribunal committed an error in taking the notional income as Rs.8,000/-p.m. instead of Rs.9,000/- p.m. as stipulated in the Lok Adalat guidelines since the accident occurred during the the year 2015.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent in MFA No.5131/2018 would support the impugned judgment and award.
7. I have given my anxious consideration to the rival contentions of the parties and perused the records.
8. In the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Pappu & Others vs. Vinod Kumar Lamba and Another (AIR 2018 SC 592), the Tribunal was fully justified in fastening the liability upon the Insurance company who would be at liberty to recover the amount paid by them from the owner of the offending vehicle. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant-claimant, the Tribunal committed an error in taking the notional income as Rs.8,000/- p.m. instead of Rs.9,000/- p.m. as per the Lok Adalat guidelines. It is submitted that the appellant-claimant would be entitled to additional enhanced compensation under the head 'loss of income on account of disability' and the disability of the appellant-claimant has to be taken as 10% instead of 6% to the entire body based on the evidence of appellant-claimant as well as the evidence of doctor who is examined as PW.2 coupled with medical records and other documents adduced by the appellant-claimant. Accordingly, the appellant-claimant would be entitled to Rs.1,83,600/- under the head 'loss of income on account of disability as here under:
9000x12x17x10/100 = Rs.1,83,600/-
9. Thus, the appellant-claimant would be entitled to additional compensation of Rs.5,44,166/- excluding Rs.15,000/- towards medical expenses from the additional enhanced compensation which comes to Rs.5,29,166/- together with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till realization as hereunder:
1 Loss of income on account of disability 2 Loss of income during laid up/treatment period Rs. 1,83,600/- Rs. 32,000/-
3 Pain and suffering Rs. 55,000/-
4 Medical expenses Rs. 2,28,566/-
5 Attendant charges, extra nutritious food and conveyance expenses Rs. 5,000/-
6 Loss of amenities Rs. 25,000/-
Total Rs. 5,29,166/-
10. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I pass the following:
ORDER * (i) The impugned judgment and award dated 13.04.2017 passed in MVC No.990/2016 on the file of X Additional Judge, MACT, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, is hereby modified.
(ii) MFA No.5961/2018 is partly allowed awarding additional compensation in a sum of Rs.5,29,166/- in favour of the appellant- claimant together with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till realization.
* Page No.7 is corrected and replaced Vide Chamber Order dated: 23.11.2020 (iii) MFA No.5131/2017 is dismissed.
(iv) The Insurance company shall pay the entire compensation amount to the claimants and liberty is reserved to them to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle.
(v)The amount in deposit in MFA No.5131/2017 is hereby directed to be transmitted to the Tribunal for making the payment.
Sd/- JUDGE SSD
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sri Ranjith Kumar G vs Sri Ajith Kumar K S And Others

Court

High Court Of Karnataka

JudgmentDate
11 December, 2019
Judges
  • S R Krishna Kumar