IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR MFA.NO.159 OF 2017(MV) C/w MFA CROB NO.3 OF 2018 IN MFA NO.159/2017 BETWEEN SRI. SHIVANNA GOWDA PATIL S/O SHANKAR GOUDA OCC: BUSINESS R/O SAI NIVAS, DOULAT KOTI ROAD SIR DESHPANDE COLONY VIJAYPUR-586101. …APPELLANT (BY SRI. YOGESH.L.HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND 1. SRI. VENKATESH.K S/O P.KODANDARAMAN AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS R/O NO.1246/D, SHIVA KRUPA 8TH ‘A’ CROSS, 1ST MAIN K.S.TOWN, KENGERI UPANAGAR BENGALURU-560 060 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE NO.44 & 45, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX BENGALURU-560025 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SHRIPAD.V.SHASTRI, ADV. FOR R1 SRI.P.B.RAJU, ADV. FOR R2) THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:15.09.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.4513/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL BENGALURU (SCCH-17), AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.98,222/- WITH INTEREST AT 6% P.A. (EXCLUDING FUTURE MEDICAL EXPENSES OF RS.20,000/-) FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS REALIZATION AND ETC., IN MFA.CROB.NO.3/2018 BETWEEN MR. VENKATESH.K AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS S/O P.KODANDARAMAN NO.1246/D, SHIVA KRUPA 8TH ‘A’ CROSS, 1ST MAIN NEAR HOYSALA CIRCLE K.S.TOWN, KENGERI UPANAGAR BENGALURU-60 …CROSS OBJECTOR (BY SRI. SHRIPAD.V.SHASTRI, ADVOCATE) AND 1. SRI. SHIVANNA GOWDA PATIL S/O SHANKAR GOUDA R/O ‘SAI NIVAS’, DOULAT KOTI ROAD SIR DESHPANDE COLONY VIJAYPUR-586101 2. THE REGIONAL MANAGER THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE NO.44 & 45, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX BENGALURU-560025 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.YOGESH, ADV. FOR R1 SRI.P.B.RAJU, ADV. FOR R2) THIS MFA CROB IN MFA NO.159/2017 IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 32 OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:15.09.2016 PASSED IN MVC NO.4513/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE XIX ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE AND MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-17), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ETC., THE APPEAL AND CROSS OBJECTION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT MFA.No.159/2017 has been filed by the appellant-owner of the vehicle which was involved in the road accident that occurred on 22.09.2015. Respondent No.1- Sri.K.Venkatesh filed a claim petition in MVC.No.4513/2015 in which the appellant-owner was arrayed as respondent No.1. The respondent No.2 is an Insurance Company.
2. By the impugned judgment and award, the tribunal allowed the claim petition against the owner of the vehicle (appellant in MFA.No.159/2017) thereby exonerating the Insurance Company from its liability. The tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.98,222/- together with interest 6% p.a. excluding future medical expenses of Rs.20,000/- from the date of petition till its realization.
3. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment and award, the appellant-owner is before this Court in an Appeal in MFA.No.159/2017. So also, the claimant has preferred MFA. Cross objection No.3/2018 inter alia contending that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is inadequate and the same requires enhancement.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the owner, learned counsel for the claimant as well as the learned counsel for the Insurance Company.
5. The learned counsel for the owner is right in contending that in the light of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of the PAPPU AND OTHERS V. VINOD KUMAR LAMBA AND ANOTHER reported in AIR 2018 SC 592, the tribunal committed an error in coming to the conclusion that Insurance Company was not liable. In the light of the law lay down by the Apex Court in the pappu’s case, I am of the opinion that Insurance Company ought to have been made liable to pay compensation to the claimant, subject to reserving liability to the Insurance Company to recover the same from the owner.
6. Insofar as the claimant’s cross objection for enhancement is concerned, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and coupled with a material on record, I am of the considered opinion that the claimant would be entitled to additional sum of Rs.40,000/- inclusive of interest by way of global compensation in addition to the compensation already awarded by the Tribunal. The said additional enhanced global compensation of Rs.40,000/- inclusive of interest is to be paid by the insurance Company in favour of the claimant. It is however made clear that the liberty is hereby reserved in favour of the Insurance Company to pay the compensation awarded by the Tribunal together with interest as well as the additional compensation awarded by this Court to the claimant and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle. Accordingly, I pass the following:
O R D E R 1. The appeal in MFA.No.159/2017 and MFA.Crob.No.3/2018 are hereby partly allowed.
2. The impugned judgment and award dated 15.09.2016 directing the appellant-owner to pay the compensation amount is hereby set aside and the respondent No.2-Insurance Company is hereby directed to pay the compensation awarded by the Tribunal together with interest as well as the enhanced additional compensation of Rs.40,000/- inclusive of interest @ 6% to the claimant.
3. The impugned judgment and award insofar as a sum of Rs.98,222/- passed by the Tribunal is hereby modified and the claimant/Cross- Objector in MFA.Crob.No.3/2018 is entitled to additional enhanced compensation amount in a sum of Rs.40,000/-.
4. Liberty is reserved to the Insurance Company to pay the compensation awarded by the Tribunal as well as the additional enhanced amount to the claimant to recover same from the owner of the vehicle. The Insurance Company is hereby directed to deposit/pay the entire compensation within a period of four weeks.
5. No costs 6. The amount in deposit to be refunded to the appellant.
Sd/- JUDGE KTY