Karnataka High Court
Krishnakant S/O Naganna Pitambar vs Mohd. Sirajuddin Siddiqui And Anr on 21 March, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G. BASAVARAJA
MFA.No.202340/2019 (MV)
BETWEEN
KRISHNAKANT S/O NAGANNA PITAMBAR
AGE: 22 YEARS, OCCU: FLEX PRINTING WORK,
R/O: H.NO.E/55, NEAR DEVI TEMPLE,
SANTOSH COLONY, ALAND ROAD,
KALABURAGI.
...APPELLANT
(BY SRI.SANJEEV PATIL, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. MOHD. SIRAJUDDIN SIDDIQUI
S/O MAJUDDIN SIDDIQUI,
AGE: MAJOR, OCCU: OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE
NO.MH-04-HC-4227, R/O: # 1047/11,
SHANTI NAGAR, NEAR KGN SCHOOL,
BHIWANDI KALYAN,
MAHARASHTRA STATE-421301.
2. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE LTD.,
THROUGH ITS MANAGER, 3RD FLOOR,
ASIAN PLAZA, SVP CIRCLE MAIN ROAD,
KALABURAGI-585101.
....RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.SUBHASH MALLAPUR, ADV. FOR R2
NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH )
2
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, PRAYING
TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED
04.07.2019 PASSED BY THE LEARNED II ADDL. SENIOR
CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, KALABURAGI IN MVC
NO.804/2018 BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION
AMOUNT OF RS.8,41,300/- AND ALSO ENHANCE THE
INTEREST PAYABLE BY THE RESPONDENTS ON THE
COMEPNSATION AMOUNT.
THE ABOVE MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL HAVING
BEEN HEARD ON 09.03.2023 AND RESERVED FOR
JUDGMENT, COMING ON FOR "PRONOUNCEMENT OF
JUDGMENT" THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for short) has been filed by the appellant- petitioner being aggrieved by the judgment and award dated 04.07.2019 passed in MVC No.804/2018 by the II Addl. Senior Civil Judge and MACT Kalaburagi, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal', for short).
2. Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for both parties, it is taken up for final disposal.
3
3. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Claims Tribunal.
4. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that that on 02-07-2018 at about 2.00 PM, near Vijayanagar colony bus stop, on Shahabazar Naka-Aland Check Por main road, Kalaburagi, petitioner along with his sister were proceeding on Motorcycle bearing No.KA-35/V-5659, that time another Motorcycle bearing No.MH-04/HC- 4227, being driven by its rider in rash and negligent manner and dashed to the petitioner's motorcycle. In the result, petitioner sustained grievous injury. Immediately he was shifted to Hospital, he spent Rs.1,00,000/- for treatment. Case was registered in Kalaburagi Addl. Traffic P.S. Cr.No.71/2018. Prior to accident petitioner was hale,, healthy and working at Raj Printers Khuba Kalaburagi and earning Rs.12,000/- per month. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident, he has been permanently disabled 4 and lost source of income. Thereby causing dent to him financially, mentally and physically. Hence, he preferred a claim petition seeking compensation.
5. After service of notice, respondent No.1 did not appear and he was placed ex-parte. The respondent No.2 appeared and filed written statement denying the contents of claim made by the petitioner and sought for dismissal of the claim petition.
6. On the basis of pleadings, the Tribunal framed relevant issues for consideration.
7. In order to substantiate the issues and to establish the case, petitioner got examined himself as PW.1 and also examined the Doctor as PW.2 and got marked documents as Exs.P1 to P12. On the other hand, respondent No.2-Insurer did not adduce any evidence. However, got marked one document as Ex.R1.
8. The Tribunal, after recording the evidence and considering the material on record, allowed the 5 petition in part and awarded compensation of Rs.1,58,700/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till date of deposit and held that respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation and directed the respondent No.2 to deposit the compensation amount. Being dissatisfied with the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, the petitioner has filed the present appeal seeking for enhancement of compensation amount.
9. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance Company.
10. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the compensation awarded by the tribunal is on the lower side. It is the vehement contention of learned counsel for the appellant-petitioner that the tribunal has erred in awarding compensation despite placing on record documents at Exs.P6 to 12. On these grounds learned counsel seeks indulgence of 6 this Court to allow the appeal and consequently seeks to enhance the compensation.
11. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent No.2/Insurance Company supports the judgment and award passed by the tribunal and does not call for any interference. Hence, prays to dismiss the appeal.
12. Perused the records and considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties.
13. The point that arise for consideration is with regard to quantum of compensation.
14. It is not in dispute with regard to manner of accident and also injuries sustained by the petitioner in the road traffic accident. In order to prove the negligence on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle, the petitioner has produced FIR and charge sheet which are marked as Exs.P1 and 3. Ex.P3, discloses that the accident was occurred due to 7 rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle.
15. Insofar as quantum of compensation is concerned, the petitioner contended that prior to the accident he was hale and healthy, aged about 21 years and he was working at Raj Printers and earning Rs.12,000/- per month. Due the accident he has sustained injuries and suffered permanent disability. In order to substantiate the same, he has examined the doctor as PW.2 who is not treated doctor. PW.2 has deposed that he has examined the petitioner, he has issued disability certificate as per Ex.P8. Ex.P8 discloses that petitioner has suffered permanent disability to an extent of 15% to the whole body. However, the tribunal has taken at 5% and the same is just and proper.
16. The petitioner has not produced any evidence with regard to his income. Therefore, the notional income has to be assessed as per the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal 8 Services Authority. Since the accident has taken place in the year 2018, the notional income has to be taken at Rs.11,750/- p.m. The petitioner is aged about 21 years at the time of the accident and multiplier applicable to his age group is '18' which is rightly taken by the tribunal. Thus, the petitioner is entitled for compensation of Rs.1,26,900/- (Rs.11,750/- x 12 x 18 x 5%) on account of 'loss of future income'.
17. In view of this Court enhancing the income to Rs.11,750/- per month and the petitioner having sustained fractures, it would not be possible for the petitioner to immediately get back to work with the said fractures and requires three months to get back to his normal work. Therefore, the loss of income during laid up period comes to Rs.35,250/- (Rs.1,750/- X 3 months).
18. Towards pain and suffering, Rs.30,000/- is awarded as against Rs.15,000/-.
9
19. Towards medical expenses, the Tribunal has awarded Rs.37,300/- on the basis of medical bills and documents produced by the petitioner. There is no reason to interfere with the same.
20. Towards attendant, conveyance, nourishing food and other incidental charges, the tribunal has awarded Rs.2,000/-. The petitioner would be entitled to Rs.5,000/- and it is accordingly awarded.
21. The tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/- towards loss of amenities. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was taken treatment as inpatient for a period of 30 days. I am of the opinion that Rs.30,000/- would be reasonable amount under this head.
22. The tribunal has not awarded any amount under the head future medical expenses. Therefore, Rs.20,000/- is awarded under this head.
23. Hence, this Court re-assesses the compensation on the following heads; 10 Sl.No. Heads By Tribunal By this Court
1. Pain & sufferings Rs.15,000/- Rs.30,000/-
2. Attendant's charges, Rs.2,000/- Rs.5,000/-
extra nourishment and conveyance
3. Loss of future Rs.86,400/- Rs.37,300/-
income
4. Medical expenses Rs.37,300/- Rs.32,250/-
5. Loss of income Rs.8,000/- Rs.30,000/-
during laid up period
6. Loss of amenities Rs.10,000/- Rs.20,000/-
Total Rs.1,58,700/- Rs.2,84,450/-
24. The petitioner is entitled for the total compensation of Rs.2,84,450/- as against Rs.1,58,700/- awarded by the tribunal. Hence, the petitioner is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.1,25,750/- with interest @ 6% p.a.
25. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER
(a) The appeal is allowed in part.
(b) The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified. The petitioner is entitled for the total compensation of 11 Rs.2,84,450/- as against Rs.1,58,700/-
awarded by the tribunal.
(c) The petitioner is entitled to an enhanced compensation of Rs.1,25,750/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.
(d) All other terms and conditions stipulated by the Tribunal shall stand intact.
(e) Respondent-Insurance Company shall pay the entire compensation amount with a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order;
Sd/-
JUDGE msr