Karnataka High Court
Sri. K.V. Manojkumar vs Sri. M. Venkatachallam on 16 June, 2014
Author: N.Ananda
Bench: N.Ananda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF JUNE 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANANDA
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.8716 OF 2013 (MV)
C/W MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.10148/2013 (MV)
IN MFA NO.8716/2013
BETWEEN:
SRI. K.V.MANOJKUMAR
S/O LATE VENKATARAMANAPPA
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
R/AT KALKUNTEAGRAHARA
ANUGONDANAHALLI HOBLI
HOSAKOTE TALUK
BANGALORE DISTRICT
BANGALORE - 560 067 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.P.BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. SRI. M.VENKATACHALLAM
S/O MUTHU GOUNDER
AGED BY MAJOR
R/AT NO.4/46, NADUPATTY
VADAKKUKADU
VALAPADY, SALEM DISTRICT
TAMILNADU - 636 001
(EX PARTE)
2. SRI RAM GENERAL INSURANCE
CO. LTD., NO.302, 3RD FLOOR
S.S.CORNER COMPLEX
OPP. BOWRING AND
LADY CURZON HOSPITAL
BANGALORE - 2 ... RESPONDENTS
2
(SRI.H.N.KESHAVA PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI.B.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2
RESPONDENT NO.1 - SERVED)
*****
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED
UNDER 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.6.2013 PASSED IN
MVC NO.5811/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE 13TH
ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL
CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT, BANGALROE PARTLY
ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION
AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
IN MFA NO.10148/2013
BETWEEN:
THE LEGAL MANAGER
SHRIRAM GENERAL INS. CO. LTD.
NO.304, 3RD FLOOR
S AND S CORNER BUILDING
OPP. BOWRING AND
LADY CURZON HOSPITAL
BANGALORE - 01 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI.H.N.KESHAVA PRASHANTH, ADVOCATE FOR
SRI.B.PRADEEP, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. K.V.MANOJ KUMAR
S/O LATE VENKATARAMANAPPA
NOW AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
R/AT KALKUNTEAGRAHARA
ANUNUGODANAHALLI HOBLI
HOSAKOTE TALUK
BANGALORE DIST. - 562 114
2. M. VENKATACHALLAM
S/O MUTHU GOUNDER
MAJOR
3
R/O 4/46, NADUPATTY
VADAKKUKADU
VALAPADY, SALEM DISTRICT
TAMILNADU - 636 456 ... RESPONDENTS
(SRI.P.BASAVARAJU, ADVOCATE
FOR RESPONDENT NO.2
RESPONDENT NO.1 - NOTICE DISPENSED WITH
VIDE ORDER DATED 11.4.2014)
*****
THIS MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL IS FILED
UNDER 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT AGAINST THE
JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.6.2013 PASSED IN
MVC NO.5811/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE 13TH
ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL
CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT, BANGALROE AWARDING
COMPENSATION OF RS.8,36,000/- WITH INTEREST @
8% P.A. AGAINST RS.5,86,000/- FROM THE DATE OF
PETITION TILL REALIZATION.
THESE APPEALS COMING ON FOR ADMISSION
THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
JUDGMENT
The appeals are listed for Admission. The lower court records are received. With the consent of learned counsel for parties, the matters are taken up for final disposal.
2. MFA No.8716/2013 is filed for claimant for enhancement of compensation and MFA 4 No.10148/2013 is filed by insurance company for reduction of compensation.
3. As per medical records, viz. wound certificate, discharge summary and C.T. scan report, claimant had suffered following injuries:
(i) fracture of mandible with displaced segment of the fracture
(ii) displaced fracture of left ramus of mandible
(iii) fracture of anterior alveolar ridge in the mid with multiple fracture fragments with displacement of tooth superiorly in to the upper tip
(iv) fracture of nasal bone on left side
(v) fracture of right frontal bone with extension through the anterior and posterior walls with involvement of cribriform plate
(vi) gross deviated nasal septum to left with a boney spur The claimant was treated in Manipal Hospital.
At the time of accident, claimant was aged about 24 years. During treatment, claimant had undergone multiple surgeries including replacement of 4 frontal teeth in upper jaw and 2 frontal teeth of lower jaw. 5 The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.8,36,000/- under following heads:
Pain and sufferings Rs. 50,000/-
Medical expenses Rs. 2,56,000/-
Loss of income during the treatment Rs. 10,000/-
transportation charges diet
and nourishment etc.
Loss of income during rest period, Rs. 20,000/-
attendant charges, etc.
Future medical expenses Rs. 2,50,000/-
Loss of amenities Rs. 1,00,000/-
For disfigurement and marriage Rs. 1,50,000/-
Prospectus
Total Rs. 8,36,000/-
4. The major components of compensation
awarded by the Tribunal are under the heads 'medical expenses' (present) and 'future medical expenses'. It is the grievance of claimant that Tribunal should have awarded compensation towards 'loss of earning capacity and future loss of earning'. It is the grievance of insurance company that the Tribunal should not have awarded compensation towards 'future medical expenditure' and 6 compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards 'loss of amenities' and 'disfigurement and marriage prospectus' is on the higher side.
5. In order to ensure the nature of injuries suffered by claimant and its residual effects, I have secured the claimant before the Court and I have seen him. The claimant had suffered the afore stated injuries and there are permanent scars on his face. The factures of mandible and nasal bone have resulted in partial disfigurement of face of claimant.
6. The claimant has completed B.Com examination. The residual effects of injury will have an impact on his earning capacity. The Tribunal has not awarded compensation towards 'loss of earning capacity and future loss of earnings'. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.2,50,000/- towards 'future medical expenses' without there being satisfactory evidence. The compensation awarded by 7 Tribunal under the head 'disfigurement and marriage prospects' is rather on the higher side. The grievance of claimant that he should have been awarded compensation towards, 'loss of earning capacity and future loss of earning', cannot be accepted, because of the higher compensation awarded towards 'future medical expenses' and 'facial disfigurement and loss of marriage prospectus'. The grievance of insurance company that the Tribunal has awarded excess compensation towards 'future medical expenses' and 'disfigurement and marriage prospectus', cannot be accepted, because the claimant has not been compensated towards 'loss of earning capacity and future loss of earning'. It is needless to state that claimant had suffered multiple fractures and he has residual effects of fractures. In the circumstances, the compensation awarded under the afore stated heads, cannot be assessed with a mathematical precision, even if there are some marginal errors. Therefore, I do not find reasons either to enhance the 8 compensation or reduce the compensation. In the result, the appeals are dismissed.
The amount deposited by insurance company, shall be transferred to the Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE AHB