IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF JULY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT M.F.A.NO.9131 OF 2013 (MV) BETWEEN SRI. SRINIVASA REDDY, S/O. RAMA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS, NAGALAHALLI, BETAMANGALA, BANGARPET TALUK, KOLAR DISTRICT.
(BY SRI. N K SIDDESWARA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SREENIVASA K L, ADVOCATE) AND 1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR BMTC, K.H. ROAD BANGALORE-560 027.
... APPELLANT 2. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. No.40, 1ST FLOOR, LAKSHMI COMPLEX, OPPOSITE VANIVILAS HOSPITAL, K.R. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 002.
... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. D. VIJAY KUMAR, ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI. D RAVISH BENNI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 05.4.2013 PASSED IN MVC NO.4545/2010 ON THE FILE OF THE 21ST ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, 19TH ACMM, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ETC.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT The appellant is in appeal under Section 173(1) of the M.V.Act, not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded under the judgment and award dated 05-4-2013 in M.V.C.No.4545/2010 on the file of the XXI Additional Small Causes Judge & XIX ACMM., Member, MACT, Bangalore.
2. The appellant claims that he was travelling as a pillion rider on 07-2-2008 at about 11:30 a.m., in motorcycle bearing No.KA-08-A-2587 from Bangalore Varthur to Batamangala, after attending his personal work. When they reached near Pushpa Nursing Home, the BMTC Bus bearing No.KA-01-F-2934 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner from behind and dashed to the motorcycle in which appellant was travelling, due to which the petitioner- appellant fell down and sustained injuries to his vital parts of the body. Immediately he was shifted to Pushpa Nursing Home and then taken treatment at Vydehi Hospital as an inpatient from 07-2-2008 to 09-2-2008. The petitioner-appellant claims that he was doing agricultural activities and earning Rs.10,000/- per month.
3. On service of notice, respondents appeared before the Tribunal and only respondent No.1- Insurance Company resisted the petition by filing its written statement contending that the accident took place due to the negligence of rider of the motorcycle and also contended that the compensation claimed by the appellant is too exorbitant.
4. The Tribunal on assessment of the entire material on record both oral and documentary evidence, has awarded a total compensation of Rs.42,652/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a., from the date of petition till deposit. The injured claimant not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is before this Court in this appeal.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the records.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant submit that the Tribunal awarded a compensation of Rs.15,000/- under the head of ‘Pain and Suffering’ is on the lower side and the compensation awarded under the head of ‘Nourishment, attendant & conveyance charges’ is also on the lower side. The Tribunal has not awarded any amount for the ‘laid up period’. He further submits that the petitioner suffered fracture of ‘Right Temporal Bone’ and initially had taken treatment as an inpatient for three days at Vydehi Hospital. Subsequently, the claimant had taken treatment at Adharsha Hosptial also. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that due to the fracture of ‘Temporal Bone’, the petitioner could not work for more than three months and Tribunal has failed to award any compensation for the ‘laid up period’ of three months.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submit that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and needs no interference by this Court with the judgment and award.
8. On behalf of the petitioner, petitioner himself examined as PW-1 and got marked 16 documents as Ex.P-1 to P-16. No oral and documentary evidence was produced on behalf of respondents.
9. The claimant/appellant suffered accidental injuries on 07-2-2008 involving motorcycle and BMTC Bus. The accident and accidental injuries suffered by claimant is not in dispute in this appeal. The appeal confined to enhancement. The claimant has suffered grievous injury of fracture of right temporal bone and he was inpatient for 2 days at Vydehi Hospital. Ex.P8 is the discharge summary, Ex.P9 and Ex.P10 are medical bills and prescriptions. Looking into the injury suffered and Ex.P8 to P10, the compensation awarded on the head of ‘pain and suffering’ is on the lower side and the claimant would be entitled for additional compensation of Rs.15,000/- on the said head. Accident is of the year 2008. The notional income of the claimant/appellant could be taken at Rs.4,500/- per month, in the absence of any material to indicate the exact monthly income of the claimant. Looking to the nature of the injury suffered, the claimant would be out of employment for a minimum period of two months. Hence, he would be entitled for Rs.9,000/- on the head of ‘salary for laid up period’. Further the compensation awarded on the head of ‘Nourishment, attendant & conveyance charges’ is on the lower side and appellant would be entitled to another Rs.5,000/- on the said head. Thus, the appellant would be entitled for modified compensation as follows:
1. Pain and Suffering Rs.30,000/-
2. Medical Expenses Rs.12,652/-
3. Nourishment, attendant & conveyance charges 4. Salary for laid up period Rs.10,000/- Rs. 9,000/-
5. Loss of amenities Rs.10,000/- Total Rs.71,652/-
Thus, the appellant would be entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.29,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part.
Sd/- JUDGE SMJ