IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.1785/2015 (MV I) Between:
Sri Saleem Hyder Ali Khan, S/o Sri Kareem Khan, Aged about 36 years, R/at No.8, 4th Cross, R.R.Nagar, Maddur, Mandya District – 571 401. ... Appellant (By Sri Marigowda, Advocate) And:
1. Sri Chinnaswamy.K S/o Kannaiah, Aged about 37 years, R/at Mission Hospital Road, T.G. Badavane, Hosakote Town, Bengaluru – 562 114.
2. The Branch Manager, IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd., No.8, KSCMF Building, 3rd Floor, 3rd Block, Cunningham Road, Bengaluru – 560 052. ... Respondents (By Sri D. Vijay Kumar, Advocate for R2;
Notice to R1 is dispensed with vide order dated 31.10.2017) This MFA is filed under Section 173 (1) of the M.V. Act against the judgment and award dated:11.08.2014 passed in MVC No.302/2014 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge and MACT., Maddur, 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 The appellant has filed this appeal seeking enhanced compensation against Judgment and Award dated 11.08.2014 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Maddur in MVC No.302/2014.
2. The appellant has sustained grievous injuries in a motor vehicle accident that occurred on 17.09.2013. The appellant has filed claim petition before the Tribunal, the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs.3,42,600/-. Aggrieved by the same, this appeal has been filed seeking enhancement of the compensation.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the Tribunal has not assessed income of the injured properly and the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side.
4. The learned counsel for the respondents sought to dismiss this appeal.
5. I have heard learned counsel for both sides.
The only ground arises for consideration is with regard to award of compensation under the head loss of future income. The Tribunal has taken income of the injured at Rs.4,500/- p.m. which is on the lower side. Considering the year of the accident as 2013 and place of the residence, the income of the injured is taken at Rs.10,000/- p.m. The Tribunal has taken disability of the injured at 16% which is just and proper. Hence, the appellant is entitled for a sum of Rs.2,88,000/- (Rs.10,000X12X15X16%) as against Rs.1,29,600/-
awarded by the Tribunal. The appellant is entitled for Rs.40,000/-(Rs.10,000X4) towards loss of income during laid up period, as against Rs.18,000/-.
6. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part.
The appellant is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.1,80,400/- which carries interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of payment.
Sd/- JUDGE NM