IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. NARAYANA SWAMY M.F.A. No.8576/2015[MV] BETWEEN :
SRI YAMUNAPPA YARANALA, S/O LATE NAGAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT LAYADGUNI BADAMI, BAGALKOT-587 203 (BY SRI P. SHIVAKUMAR, ADV.) AND :
1. THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.143/144, CKN CHAMBERS, 1ST MAIN ROAD, SESHADRIPURAM, BENGALURU-560 020 REP. BY IT’S MANAGER 2. MR. ANANDA N., S. NAGAPPA, NO.19, 5TH CROSS, 7TH MAIN, 3RD BLOCK, TR NAGAR, BENGALURU-560 028 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI S. KRISHNA KISHORE, ADV., FOR R1; SRI YATHIRAJ, ADV., FOR R2) …RESPONDENTS THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF M.V.ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 13.08.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.1600/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE XVIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-4, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
J U D G M E N T Appeal is for enhancement of compensation by the claimant for the injuries sustained by him in an accident which occurred on 23.03.2014, near Basaveshwara Provision Store, Indiranagar, Nelamangala Taluk, due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of a Car bearing Reg. No.KA-05/MM-5625.
2. The case of the appellant is that the compensation awarded in MVC No.1600/2014 on 13.08.2015 by the MACT, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru, SCCH-4 (for short ‘the Tribunal’), under all heads is on the lower side. Hence, this appeal.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that at the time of accident the appellant was working as a Mason and earning Rs.10,000/- per month, hence, the income assessed by the Tribunal at Rs.6,000/- per month is on the lower side. In accident he has suffered 1 x 1 cm cut injury over the 1/3rd of left leg with fracture of tibia and injury to the right leg with fracture of tibia. Though, PW2-Doctor has reported 30% disability to the left lower limb and 20% disability to the whole body, the Tribunal has assessed only 10%, which is also on the lower side. Hence, he submits to re- assess the notional income at Rs.9,000/- per month taking reliance on year of accident and prayed to allow the appeal.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent- Insurance Company submitted that the evidence adduced by PW2-Doctor regarding disability is exorbitant. He further submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for any interference.
5. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for both the sides.
6. Accident and injuries suffered by the appellant in the road traffic accident is not in dispute. As per Wound Certificate, appellant has sustained the injuries as stated above and he was treated in the hospital as inpatient for four days. X-rays show that the appellant sustained type I compound fracture both bone leg lower 1/3rd on both. He underwent surgery and discharged with the follow up advice. PW2-Doctor has assessed 30% disability to the left lower limb and 20% disability to the whole body and the Tribunal has rightly taken 10% disability to the whole body. However, the income of the appellant assessed by the Tribunal is on the lower side. When there is no proof of income, notional income is to be assessed by taking into consideration year of accident and cost of living. In the instant case the accident is of the year 2014, hence, this Court would assess the income at Rs.9,000/- per month to meet the ends of justice. Under these circumstances, compensation towards loss of future income due to disability works out to Rs.1,18,800/- (Rs.9,000/- x 12 x 11 x 10%). Further, considering the facts that the injuries suffered and treatment undergone, it is observed that the appellant might have taken bed rest and follow up treatment at least for a period of six months, hence, I award a sum of Rs.54,000/- towards loss of income during laid up period against Rs.6,000/- and a sum of Rs.65,000/- towards pain and suffering as against Rs.35,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Further I deem it fit to award Rs.25,000/- towards food, nourishment, attendant and conveyance charges as the appellant is basically from Badami of Bagalkot District and was staying in Bengaluru for surviving and he might have spent some amount when he was under treatment as against Rs.20,000/- and a sum of Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities as against Rs.20,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. However, a sum of Rs.1,16,754/- towards medical expenses and Rs.25,000/- towards future medical expenses awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not call for interference by this Court. In all, the appellant is entitled to additional compensation of Rs.1,32,610/- in addition to what is awarded by the Tribunal/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization.
Out of the enhanced amount 75% is to be invested in Fixed Deposit in the name of the appellant in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank for a period of five years with liberty to withdraw the interest accrued on it periodically.
Sd/- JUDGE Sbs*