IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 05TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.829/2015 (MV) Between:
Sri Vishwanath S, S/o Shanmugam M, Aged about 31 years, R/at No.18, 4th Cross, Azadnagara, Mysore Road, Chamarajpet, Bangalore- 560 018.
(By K.V. Naik, Advocate for Sri Shripad V Shastri, Advocate) And:
The Managing Director TNSTCS (SALEM) Ltd., No.12, Ramakrishna Road, Regional Office @ Dharmapuri, Dharmapuri – 636 705, Tamilnadu.
(By Sri. Bopanna. B, Advocate) …Appellant …Respondent This MFA is filed u/s 173(1) of MV Act against the Judgment and Award dated 17.09.2014 passed in MVC No.6142/2012 on the file of the Judge, Court of Small Causes & XXVI ACMM, Bengaluru, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of compensation.
This appeal coming up for Admission this day, the court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT Appeal is filed by the injured/claimant against the judgment and award dated 17.09.2014 passed in MVC No.6142/2012 on the file of the Judge, Court of Small Causes & XXVI ACMM, Bengaluru, partly allowing the claim petition for compensation. The Tribunal has awarded sum of Rs.2,84,000/- with interest at 6% p.a. The appellant has sought for enhancement. Accident is of the year 2012.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal on all the heads is on the lower side and same has to be enhanced.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent supports the judgment and award passed by the Tribunal and sought for dismissal of the appeal.
4. I have heard learned counsel for both sides and I have gone through the materials available on record.
5. The claimant/appellant has suffered injuries in the motor vehicle accident occurred on 22.06.2012 and hence, he has filed claim petition before the Tribunal seeking for compensation. In support of his claim, he has examined the Doctor as PW2. For the purpose of assessing disability, the Doctor has deposed that the injured has suffered 30% disability and considering the evidence of the Doctor and medical records, the Tribunal has assessed 15% disability. It is claimed that the claimant was working as a Welder and was earning Rs.15,000/- p.m. However, such income was not established by producing cogent evidence before the Tribunal. Hence, the Tribunal by taking notional income at Rs.7,500/- p.m and considering the disability of 15% has awarded a sum of Rs.2,30,000/- under the head Loss of future earning capacity. Further, by considering the nature of injuries sustained by the claimant and based on the medical records, the Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.2,84,000/- including the medical expenses, which is just and proper. Though the appellant’s submission is considered, it is resulting in enhancement of few thousand rupees only, which is not substantial in nature. Therefore, I don’t have any reasonable ground to interfere with the Judgment and Award passed by the Tribunal.
Hence, the appeal stands dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE DL