Bangalore District Court
Raghavendra.Y vs Rajeeth B.A on 1 April, 2025
KABC020090612020
IN THE COURT OF XIII ADDL. SMALL CAUSES AND ACJM
AND ADDL. MACT., BENGALURU, (SCCH-15)
PRESENT: Smt. KUMARI SUJATHA.
B.Com., LL.B.,
XIII Addl. Small Causes Judge,
ACJM, Court of Small Causes
& Member,MACT-15, Bengaluru.
MVC No.1603/2020
Dated this the 1st day of April 2025
Petitioner/s: Sri. Raghavendra Y
S/o Yanganna,
Aged about 31 years,
Hanumanthanahalli,
Maridasanahalli Post,
Pavagada Taluk,
Tumkur District - 561 202.
(By Sri. R. Vedananda Char, Adv.)
Versus
Respondents : 1) Sri. Rajeeth B.A.
S/o Ananda B.
No.17, Kanakalakshmi Krupa,
1st Cross, R.K. Layout,
Opp. Saraswathi School,
Shettehalli, Jalahalli West,
Bengaluru - 560 015.
2
SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020
(RC Owner of Maruthi Tour S Diesel
bearing Reg.No.KA-04-AC-1728)
(Exparte)
2) National Insurance Co. Ltd.,
Regional Office, No.144,
Shubharam Complex, M.G. Road,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
(Policy No.60470031191344160450
valid from 11.09.2019 to 10.09.2020)
(By Sri. S. Maheswara, Adv.)
*****
:JUDGMENT:
This Claim Petition is filed by the Petitioner against Respondents under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking Compensation of Rs.50,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a Road Traffic Accident.
2. The substance of averments made in the Petition are as under:
That on 23.02.2020 at about 1.30 p.m. when the Petitioner was proceeding in a Activa Honda bearing Reg. No.KA-44-S- 9302 from Whitefield towards Dasarahalli and when he 3 SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020 reached near Sparsh Hospital, Tumkur Road, Bengaluru, at that time, one Maruthi Tour S Diesel vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-04-AC-1728 driven by its driver came in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the Motorcycle of the petitioner and caused the accident. Due to the said impact, the Petitioner had sustained grievous injuries.
Immediately, after the accident, the Petitioner was taken to Hosmat Hospital, Bengaluru, wherein the petitioner took treatment as an inpatient. The Petitioner has spent Rs.10,00,000/- towards medical expenses and other incidental charges.
3. Prior to the date of accident, the Petitioner was hale and healthy and he was working as a Company Executive and was earning a sum of Rs.50,000/- per month. Due to the injuries sustained by the Petitioner, he could not attend his duty and he lost income from the date of accident. The accident has occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the Maruthi Tour S Diesel vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-04-AC- 4
SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020 1728 by its driver. The Respondent No.1 is the Owner and Respondent No.2 is the insurer of the Maruthi Tour S Diesel vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-04-AC-1728. Therefore, both the Respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the Petitioner.
4. In pursuance of service of notice to the Respondents, Respondent No.1 remained absent and he was placed exparte. Respondent No.2 appeared before the Court through its Counsel and filed its detailed Objection Statement.
5. The Respondent No.2 in its detailed Objection Statement denied the age, avocation and income of the Petitioner and the accident caused by the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle and also the injuries sustained by the Petitioner and the expenses incurred for the treatment. Further it admitted the issuance of policy to the offending vehicle. Further it contended that the driver of the offending vehicle was not holding valid and effective driving license as on the date of accident and thereby violated the 5 SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020 terms and conditions of the policy. Therefore, it is not liable to pay the compensation to the Petitioner. On these grounds, it has prayed to dismiss the Petition against it.
6. On the rival Pleadings, this Tribunal has framed the following Issues:
ISSUES
1) Whether the Petitioner proves that, he had sustained grievous injuries in a Road Traffic Accident that occurred on 23.02.2020 at about 1.30 p.m., near Sparsh Hospital, Tumkur road, Bengaluru, due to rash and negligent driving of the Maruthi Tour S Diesel vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-04/AC-
1728 by its driver?
2) Whether the Petitioner is entitled for the compensation as prayed for? If yes, what is the quantum and who is liable to pay?
3) What Order or Award?
7. In order to prove the case of the Petitioner, the Petitioner got examined himself as P.W.1 and got marked 20 6 SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020 documents at Ex.P.1 to Ex.P-20. Further, the Petitioner has examined two witnesses as PW.2 and 3 and got marked 2 documents at Ex.P21 and 22 and closed his side evidence. On the other hand, Respondent No.2 has examined one witness as RW.1 and got marked one document at Ex.R1 and closed its side evidence.
8. Having heard the arguments and upon perusal of the depositions, documents exhibited and materials available on record, my answer to the above Issues are as under:
Issue No.1 : Partly in the Affirmative. Issue No.2 : Partly in the Affirmative. Issue No.3 : As per the Final Order for the following :
REASONS
9. Issue No.1: It is the case of the Petitioner that, he had sustained grievous injuries in the Road Traffic Accident that occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending Maruthi Tour S Diesel vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-04-AC-1728 by its driver.
7
SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020
10. On the other hand, the Respondent No.2 has denied the accident occurred by the rash and negligent driving of the offending Maruthi Tour S Diesel vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-04- AC-1728 by its driver.
11. In order to prove the case of the Petitioner, the Petitioner got examined himself as P.W.1 and got marked 20 documents at Ex.P.1 to Ex.P-20 and he has re-iterated the Petition averments in his Chief-affidavit. Ex.P-1 to Ex.P-11 are the True copies of FIR, Complaint, Charge sheet, Spot mahazar with Spot Sketch, IMV Reports, Police Notice and Reply, Wound Certificate and Discharge summaries. Ex.P12 to 20 are the Aadhaar card, DL, Copy of Judgment, Medical bills, Prescriptions, Advance receipts, Outpatient records, Lab report and Diploma Certificate.
12. Upon going through the documents exhibited, Ex.P- 1 & 2 are the True copies of the FIR & Complaint which shows that on the Complaint lodged by one Mahesh S/o Narayan Shetty, the Yashwanthapura Traffic Police have registered the 8 SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020 case against the driver of the Maruthi Tour S Diesel vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-04-AC-1728 for the offences punishable under Sec. 279 and 337 of IPC. Ex.P.3 is the True copy of the Charge sheet which has been submitted by the ASI of the Yashwanthapura Traffic Police Station against the driver of the offending Maruthi car bearing Reg.No.KA-04-AC-1728 for the offences punishable under Sec.279, 338 of IPC. It also shows that the Charge sheet was filed against the rider of the Hero Honda scooter i.e., the Petitioner. Ex.P.4 is the true copy of Spot Mahazar with Sketch which shows that the concerned police had drawn mahazar and sketch at the spot in the presence of panchas. Ex.P.5 and 6 are the IMV reports which shows that the said accident does not occurred due to any mechanical defects of the vehicles. Ex.P7 and 8 are the Police Notice and Reply. Ex.P.9 is the Wound certificate of the Petitioner which shows that the Petitioner had sustained grievous injury. Ex.P10 and 11 are the Discharge summaries. Ex.P12 is the Aadhaar card of the Petitioner. Ex.P13 is the DL 9 SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020 of the Petitioner. Ex.P14 is the Certified copy of Judgment in CC No.3104/20. Ex.P15 is the Medical bills. Ex.P16 is the Prescriptions. Ex.P17 is the Advance Receipts. Ex.P18 Outpatient Record. Ex.P19 is the Lab report. Ex.P20 is the Diploma Certificate.
13. Further, the Petitioner has examined eye witness by name Mahesh as PW.2 and doctor by name Dr. S. Ramachandra as P.W.3 and got marked 2 documents at Ex.P.21 & 22.
14. P.W.1 is subjected for cross-examination by the Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2. To rebut the evidence of PW.1, the Respondent No.2 has examined its Assistant Manager by name Himendra Kartantik Simha as RW.1 and got marked one document at Ex.R1. PW.1 in his cross-examination deposed that at the time of accident there was no heavy traffic and hence, there was chance that two wheeler would proceed with high speed. He also admitted that the front portion of his motorcycle got damaged and the 10 SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020 backside of the car not damaged and he admitted that in the Charge sheet i.e., Ex.P3, he was shown as Accused No.2. PW.2 is the eye witness has deposed in his cross-examination that the accident spot is a heavy traffic road and he denied the suggestion that the accident has occurred in the middle of the road. Upon going through the Ex.P4 - Spot mahazar and Spot sketch shows from the accident spot there is 19 feet distance towards Northern side and 6 feet distance towards Southern side. Hence, it shows that the accident was occurred on the left side of the road.
15. Ex.P14 is the CC of the Judgment in CC No.3104/2020 on the file of MMTC - III Court, Bengaluru, acquitting the Accused / Petitioner herein for the offence punishable under Sec.279 of IPC. However, the Judgment of the Criminal Court is not binding on the MVC claim petition. The Charge sheet has filed against both the driver of the car and the Petitioner. However, the driver of the car has pleaded guilty. The available materials are record and the evidence led 11 SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020 by both parties shows that on the alleged date, the driver of the car has driven the vehicle with rash and negligent manner and suddenly applied the brake and since, the Petitioner also in a speed, he could not control his scooter and thereby when he tried to apply brake to his scooter, it dashed to the back portion of the car. Thereby, the Petitioner and pillion rider fell down. Hence, there is some portion of contributory negligence on the part of the Petitioner himself towards the said accident. Accordingly, this Tribunal is of the opinion that the driver of the offending car has attributed 90% contributory negligence towards the said accident and the Petitioner attributed 10% of contributory negligence towards the said accident and in the said accident he had sustained injury. Accordingly, I answer Issue No.1 'Partly in the Affirmative'.
16. Issue No.2: As the Petitioner has proved that the accident has occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver, the Petitioner is entitled for compensation.
12
SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020
17. In the Petition, the Petitioner has shown his age as 31 years. The Petitioner has produced his Aadhaar card and Driving Licence at Ex.P12 and Ex.P.13 which shows his date of birth as 16.06.1989. The accident has taken place on 23.02.2020. Hence, at the time of accident, the Petitioner was aged about 30 years, 8 months and 7 days. Hence, the age of the Petitioner to be taken at 31 years for the purpose of assessment.
18. In the petition, the Petitioner has stated that he was working as a Company Executive and he was earning a sum of Rs.50,000/- per month. But, he has not produced any document in respect of income. Therefore, in the absence of income proof, the notional income to be taken at Rs.14,500/- per month for the purpose of assessment of compensation.
19. With this background, the quantum of compensation to which the Petitioner is entitled may be adjudicated. For the sake of convenience, discussion may be had under following heads :
13
SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020 I. COMPENSATION TOWARDS PAIN, SHOCK AND SUFFERING :
20. The Wound Certificate i.e., Ex.P-9 issued by the Hosmat Hospital, shows that in the said accident the Petitioner had sustained following injury:
1) Ankle Bimalleour Fracture As per the opinion of the Doctor, the said injury is grievous in nature.
21. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained by the Petitioner, I am of the opinion that, awarding compensation of ₹25,000/- under this head would be just and reasonable.
II. COMPENSATION TOWARDS LOSS OF AMENITIES :
22. Bearing in mind the nature of the injuries sustained by the Petitioner, I am of the opinion that awarding compensation of ₹15,000/- under this head would be just and reasonable.
14
SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020 III. COMPENSATION TOWARDS LOSS OF INCOME DURING THE LAID-UP PERIOD:
23. The Petitioner deposed in his evidence that he had taken treatment at Hosmat Hospital, Bengaluru. Upon going through Ex.P.10 and Ex.P.11 - Discharge summaries of Hosmat Hospital, Bengaluru, shows that the Petitioner was admitted as an inpatient in the said hospital from 23.02.2020 to 24.02.2020. Therefore, while calculating the total period of which the Petitioner was admitted as an inpatient, it comes to 02 days.
24. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained by the Petitioner, I am of the opinion that the laid up period may be considered as one month. Hence, the Petitioner is entitled for compensation of ₹14,500/- under this head (@ ₹14,500/- per month ).
15
SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020 IV. COMPENSATION TOWARDS ATTENDANT'S CHARGES, EXTRA DIET & NOURISHMENT AND CONVEYANCE :
25. Admittedly, the Petitioner has sustained injuries and during the laid up period, the Petitioner might have engaged an attendant and also he might have spent some amount towards extra diet and nourishment and for his conveyance. In the facts and circumstances of the case, awarding compensation of ₹3,000/- (@ ₹100/- per day) towards attendants charges, ₹3,000/- towards extra diet and nourishment and ₹3,000/- towards conveyance would be just and reasonable. In all, the Petitioner is entitled for compensation of ₹9,000/- under this head.
V. COMPENSATION TOWARDS MEDICAL EXPENCES :
26. The petitioner has stated in his evidence that, he had spent Rs.10,00,000/- towards medical and other incidental charges. In order to prove this fact, he has produced medical bills at Ex.P15. I have gone through the same and acceptable medical bills comes to Rs.84,359/-. Hence, by rounding off the 16 SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020 same, the same to be taken at Rs.84,360/-. Hence, I am of the opinion that the Petitioner is entitled for Rs.84,360/- under this head.
VI. COMPENSATION TOWARDS LOSS OF FUTURE EARNINGS / COMPENSATION TOWARDS PERMANENT DISABILITY:
27. The petitioner has stated that due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident, he has suffered permanent disablement and he is not able to do his work as he used to do earlier. Even in his evidence, P.W.1 has deposed to that effect.
28. Further, the Petitioner got examined one witness by name Dr. Ramachandra as P.W.3 who has deposed regarding the injuries sustained by the Petitioner in a Road Traffic Accident and the treatment taken by him at Hosmat Hospital, Bengaluru. Further, he assessed the physical disability of the Petitioner towards Left Lower Limb at about 19.33% and towards whole body disability at 9.66%. PW.3 got marked Outpatient Record with Calculation and X-ray at Ex.P21 and 17 SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020
22. In the cross-examination he admitted that he has not treated the Petitioner and except the X-ray he has not seen other medical records of the Petitioner and he did not get the opinion of the treated doctor of the Petitioner. Further, he deposed that the Lateral Malleules was united and the Medial Malleules was mal united and now the implants are removed. Further, he admitted that the Petitioner can do the work by sitting. Hence, having regard to the medical records placed on record, the evidence of P.W.3 and the nature of the injuries sustained by the Petitioner, I am of the opinion that considering the disability of the Petitioner with respect to the whole body at 3% would be just and proper.
29. As per Sarla Verma's Case (2009 ACJ 1298 SC), the multiplier applicable to the Petitioner is 16. With multiplier of 16, income of ₹14,500/- per month and disability of the Petitioner with respect to his whole body at 3%, the loss of future income comes to ₹83,520/- (₹14,500/- x 12 = 1,74,000/-, ₹1,74,000/- x 16 x 3/100 =83,520/-). Hence, the 18 SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020 Petitioner is entitled for compensation of ₹83,520/- under this head.
TOTAL COMPENSATION TO WHICH THE PETITIONER IS ENTITLED:
30. To sum up, the Petitioner is entitled for compensation under the following heads :
1. Pain, shock & Suffering ₹ 25,000 /-
2. Loss of amenities ₹ 15,000/-
3. Loss of income during the laid ₹ 14,500/-
up period
4. Attendant's charges, Extra diet, ₹ 9,000/-
and conveyance
5. Medical expenses ₹ 84,360/-
6. Loss of Future Income ₹ 83,520/-
Total ₹2,31,380/-
31. Thus, totally the Petitioner is awarded compensation of ₹2,31,380/- with costs and simple interest at 6% p.a. from the date of this petition till the date of realization. 19
SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020
32. Regarding Liability: This Court has arrived at the conclusion that the accident has been occurred by the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the Offending Maruthi Car bearing Reg.No.KA-04-AC-1728 and by the Petitioner himself. In this case, the Respondent No.1 is the owner and the Respondent No.2 is the insurer of the offending vehicle. There is no dispute about the validity of the Policy at the time of the accident. Further, this tribunal comes to conclusion that the driver of offending car contributed 90% of Negligence towards the accident. The Petitioner contributed 10% of negligence towards the accident. Therefore, the Respondent No.1 and 2 jointly and severally are liable to pay 90% of the compensation amount out of the total compensation to the Petitioner. The Respondent No.2, who is liable to indemnify the Respondent No.1, has to pay the compensation amount to the Petitioner. Accordingly, I answer Issue No.2 "Partly in the Affirmative".
20
SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020
33. Issue No.3: In view of my findings on Issues No. 1 and 2, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER The Claim Petition filed by the Petitioner against the Respondent No.1 and 2 U/S 166 of M.V. Act is hereby allowed in part with costs.
The Petitioner is entitled for
Compensation of ₹2,31,380/- along with
interest at the rate of 6% per annum from
the date of the Petition till the date of deposit of Award amount.
The Respondent No.1 and 2 jointly and severally are liable to pay 90% of the compensation amount out of the total compensation amount to the Petitioner.
The Respondent No.2 being the insurer, is directed to deposit the Award amount and interest as stated supra within 60 days from the date of the Award.21
SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020
Out of the compensation amount
awarded to the Petitioner, 75% of the award amount with accrued interest shall be released to the Petitioner by way of E- payment and after proper identification. The remaining 25% award amount shall be deposited as F.D. in the name of the Petitioner in any Nationalized or Scheduled bank for a period of three years.
The Advocate fee is fixed at ₹1,000/-. Draw Award accordingly.
(Dictated to the stenographer directly on computer, computerized by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this the 1st day of April, 2025) (Smt. Kumari Sujatha.) XIII Addl. Small Causes Judge, ACJM,Court of Small Causes & Member, MACT-15, Bengaluru.22
SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020
Annexure
Witnesses examined on behalf of the Petitioner :
P.W.1 : Sri. Raghavendra Y PW.2 : Sri. Mahesh PW.3 : Dr. Ramachandra
Documents marked as Exhibits for the Petitioner :
Ex.P-1 : True copy of FIR
Ex.P-2 : Complaint
Ex.P-3 : Charge sheet
Ex.P-4 : Spot mahazar with Sketch
Ex.P-5 & 6 : IMV reports
Ex.P-7 & 8 : Police Notice with Reply
Ex.P-9 : Wound Certificate
Ex.P-10 & 11 : Discharge summaries
Ex.P-12 : Aadhaar card
Ex.P-13 : DL
Ex.P-14 : Certified copy of Judgment
Ex.P-15 : Medical bills
Ex.P-16 : Prescriptions
Ex.P-17 : Advance receipts
Ex.P-18 : Outpatient records
Ex.P-19 : Lab report
Ex.P-20 : Diploma Certificate
23
SCCH 15 MVC No.1603/2020
Ex.P-21 : Outpatient record with Calculation sheet
Ex.P-22 : X-ray
Witnesses examined on behalf of the Respondent :
RW-1 : Sri. Himendra Kartantik Simha Documents marked as Exhibits for the Respondents:
Ex.R1 : Authorization Letter
( Smt. Kumari Sujatha.)
XIII Addl. Small Causes Judge,
ACJM,Court of Small Causes &
Member, MACT-15, Bengaluru.