The Branch Manager The New India ... vs Mr Mahadev S/O Poojappa on 24 January, 2011

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

The Branch Manager The New India ... vs Mr Mahadev S/O Poojappa on 24 January, 2011

Bench: B.Sreenivase Gowda

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

DATED THIS THE 24TH DAY op JANUARY, 2011
BEFORE  T'

THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE B.sR,EENIv§sE . 

M.F.A. NO. 4321 092097'    

C/W    %
M.F.A. Crob No.  2003 
m MFA 4321/2007»,    L 

BETWEEN

The Branch_l\.€';ax;1;2_ge1§, 1.   V  u _ _
'_I'_he New E1j1(}iid ASsa1reiz1Ce'C0,- E;t.<:I., V 
No. 345.  F'1o (')"r;?._MdriQ;2,:idwi  c.,o'u,rt--_.
27?" Cross,'-. III }:3IQC}$L, a.yar1a_garV.,?
Ba_ng::1i'(§i*e ~.  1 1  
Reprégsenteci bfpthe _   A ' 

Managar, «. -- V '   1
RegionaI"--{)i'i'ice{" . _ 

No 2B. Unity BuVi}'--dir1g Annexe,
Misjsion Road,"  A

 "  _ Bsmgaioreg 560 027;

. Appellant

V [By R Rajagopaian, Adv.)

   .1\/iahad<~:V.:

S/<3. Raojappa,
Aged 26 years,
R/at N0 6, .E)c3vae321n<ir21



Ix.)

Ir1<:iust.ria1 Areea, Whitefieid Road,
Be1.11g2110r€~. ~ 580 048.

{mi

Mr. K. D@$ah,

S/0. Kannappa,

Major,

R/a. N0. "E14, 3"" Main,
Ramachandraptlram ,
Bangaiore. +~ 560 021.

 Réspcﬁdeiats

[By M /5 Lawyers Neﬂ Agxr. f51:R.1,   
R2 notice dispensegti}.   V

This MFA is fi1e'cz...tJ/S' 1'_7"3--{ 1)  Act eigainst the
judgment and awarc1"'dated:t_ 'i;-.1}. }.0*.2QO(:'w_ passed in MVC
No. 7218/2005 on the fi3e_of _t1n:e 2<IIV'Ad.d'l. Judge, Court
of Smail CaL:s£;:s§,   E\a'IA{'3T;- «§}xIét:r{)poiitan Area,
Bangalore, {_'SC}f.,'.tH_N£w.10}';" aWa1rdi'x':g----wwa Compensation of
Rs. 8,}.1,8'U{}/~"--wi;V=th'  13.21. from the date of
l3etitio'n ti:1,.ciié:h€?s1t'; '  .,  

IN MFA C3013'  V

B}:«:'1fWE1tj1szj -

 -  .    %%%%% 14 t
 , 'S./0. Poojappa,
 _ *!\gé:'d 27' yr5au_"s';.
" ._ "'ﬁ._::;t.  Dlévasandra

I13__ci1ustV1'iaI7--Area, Whitefield Road,
Ba'bgz«::'--].Qre"~ 580 048.

... Cross Objector

[By M / S Lawyers Net,
Sriytlts R. Chancirashekar, S.J. Krishnoji R161-()§
Girish, Anupamzz. DJ, Advocatzes}



AN!)

1. Tbs Divisionai Manager,
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
NG.345, 2"'? Floor, Mananéi Court,
23"" Cross, Jayanagar, III Block.
Bangalore ~ 560 GM.

2. Mr. K. Dessah,   
S/0. Kannappa, V'
Age :30': knawn,
R/a. No. 114, 3?" M33':-,.___
Ramachandrapuram,  »   9
Bangalare -« 560 021. 

 " ~-._    ' v  .. Respondents

{By Sri. R. Rajago'p};1}an;--

This...M}?'zfé';j. (3ROB_ 1;; M1;-¥'§.NQ§3i321/2007 is ﬁled U /Order :41 Rqlé: 2:2. g5£T%ig:*Pc,%%4agVa;nst the judgement and awarcikl, Vpa--s_S&_d in No. 7218/2005 on the file of theT"'E;41h Add1."«Judge, Caurt of Small Causes. Memb--er,'-- ' »TBa:;"g"ai0re, (SCCH.N0.10), partly allowing' "the v.<_:1ai1;:1 p__cé'£::'Ei011 for compensation and seeking é1'1hancement'{>.f compensation. and«1WFA Crass Objeciion are coming on fof' A{'§rr:i_S€>iQn, this day, the Court. Qlelivereci the V JUDGMEN'?

As this appeal and cross objection are arising out "Ui'--a: cﬁiinmon judgment and award of the Tribunal, they are heard togethei, admitted and disposed of by this cemmon judgment.

2. For the sake of C'()I1V€i"}i€1'1(3€ partie-s are rc5ffe'1*25e<;}"'t§:a as they are referred to in the Claim pe':iti0n.--'.. V V'

8. Brief facts of the ease as petitien are:

That on 05.08.2095'-Qﬁhenvh S waS proceeding on regiveiréizion N0.

KA~{)3»»EI~I«85'?3 as a piﬁj.AQ1': ,":"i:§er-~e3:£A«'f}¥fh.iteﬁe1d read in front of Se1i}::fyipa Mahadevapura, Bangvé1<§"fe'eA _v Vafa 'bearing registration N0. KA-O3%N'~'.-79VE3~ speed in a rash and negligent aif£:a I111e':* ;;{11<i"'eiashed against the motor cycle, ' 35-5 1%ie'su'}f;A the C"1"éi;mant sustained injuries. Hence he Viiiedee before MACT, Bangalore seeking of R-e3.5_OO§O00/-- and the Tribunal has xawaxiietél a compensation of 1315.3, 1 1,80€)/- with interest €59/0 p.a, es»

4. Aggrieved by the qua.I1t.t1m. of eempensation awarded? The insurer of the otfendilag Vehicle h.as fi1ed MFA4321/2007 seeking reduction of eempe_rtss"tie~1d, whereas the C1'c"£.iI1'1aIT11". has filed cross objee-titan_seeR;iﬁg ' enhancement: of e<>mpensat.ion. -

5. As there is no dispute sustained by the claimant iri~._e;~:Qad Vtrafti-:1 fci_eei':Ie:i't,x due V to riegligent driving V0i7..V.offentd'i1i;§"vehicle 'é1f1'd 'xhlbility of the insurer of the offehdingj 'enly point that remains for .eensider:at:i0'n«.if1tiee nafjpeai is:

""" quantum of ﬁcemperxsation awzitjcieci by the Tribunal is just jarid prepe1*.._or'.."dQes it cal} for reduction or e:1htaneerr1~ex:t'?"--.. " V

6. After the learned Counsel for the parties the award of the Tribunal, I am of the ths:t'v_».t:he"eempensat:i0r1 awarded by the Tribunal is I1C)f"jL1'_'-'=',-v'{:"l aiid proper it is on the lower side and therefore itrts deserved to be enhanced.

As per EXP 4 Wﬂlllld. eerti.fic:ate the tilaimaiit has i " ~~sust.air1ed the f'0lEowit1,gin}'t11-ies:

i) Fracture of left. femur:

ii) Fracture of right femur;

iii) Abrasion over the left ring finger E X I Injuries sust:a111ed and t,reatmen_te t::1ke1'1 are also from discharge summary Ex P 6. Lab report: * Outpatient record Ex. P 12, l.'r1p_atier';t; nu X~rays P 14 and P 15 evidence of the claimant Var1d~v..Vt.he "d0e'torVeXa.rﬂi'ne'd aslr PWS 1 and 2 respectively. P'N;2"L'*D'f'~;..LAB.K.Sudh:al<anthan in his evidence hariif claimant has sustained 27%-:to._the' 33% to left lower limb {indexed :5 where my;

8. of injuries Rs.70,000/,.

awarded tihe-T'rib11rAie1l towards pain and suffering is P o1'1'e'*t:h_e."3n_igher it is deserved to be reduced by 1 award Rsr60,000/~ under this head. the medical bills produced by the Claimant for Rz.s;..1:',}l.90l/+ are not disptttedfche 'I'ribur1a,l is not P' in awarding only RSA1§00§0Q0/7 towards = ...----'roe€iical expenses holding that the said sum exorbit.a:oi. Hence I eiward Rs.1,1.2,000/~ towards medical expenses as per biils.

E0. He was treated as iiipafient. in Hosz11e1iIa~..1fiospiiaI.. for 15 days. Co1isideringt.he same 1O,()V()Q'/'..g by the Tribunal towards incidental.Ae>§p'ens4es--._suehwasi' Conveyance, nourishment: a.r1d__ at,i'.ei1._da.I1t: Chairgesiis List and proper and it does not eaf1"V«i'o1'

11. The Claimant Rs.3,500/~ pifl. by <.>\y*<};'§1~:i:i:Ls;,2;p:V:'as has produced salary Certificate ex. P 8, but certificates was not eXamii?1eeL. pi of proof of income the_.--Tribi{f:a:1 'h.asA"'.right.1y assessed his income at of injuries suggests he must A have been amder treatment and rest at least: for a "period of-.7 and 1 award Rs.2l.,0O0/W towards loss of ..iI1COI1'}£::duri11g' laid up period as against Rs.1E3,O0O/s ' awardeci by the Tribunal.

"T12. Coiisideririg the disability stated by the doctor and an a:133c)ui1t, diseomfori: and unhappiness the Ciaimant has to undergo in his future ﬁfe R$.15,0QO/~ awarded by the Tribunal towards loss sf amenities is just and proper and it does not call for interfereii€:s%{g"-._:*-,_

13. Regarding less (if future inc0me:~ Learned Counsel appe:i,ringg..T fi3f--_ "the. 4*i.:t';:3_u1:erf submits that the Ciai.mar1t.i'n- his éVig:fé;rice iiitzigg .§tQteiiﬁ is continuing his job and }€»:§v§§.2,500/"

pm. and therefore coirziziensation towards loss t V V the claimant " tiigzibiiity stated by the Ci0C'£():iTA th€1't%V"'iii}§i1.¢:tid11aI disability which wouid affect therefore the claimant is e1f_ii:~i.tied' fort.» "c01';ipensation. towarés 1085 of future ' t.if1'COm.f1i.' « " it" V A the rival contentions, the disability stettccittiyythe doctor at 27% to the right lower iimb, 33% A AA,tti"i~«f3ft iower iimb and 20% to the whole body, ends of Vtjustice would be mat if a sum of Rs.i,O{),{}O{)/~ is awa.rd€<:i tmxzarcis loss of future: aarnirig capacity anﬂ disabiiify as against Rs.91.800/~ awarded by the TI'ib11I"l.':1] under the head 'ioss of futu re income'.

14. Considering the nature of injuries and evidence of the doctor Rs.10,000/-- awarded by the '1'ri":iji:en211 towards future medical expenses is just and~--p'_1'opee1',_i'i:..« does not call for interference.

15. Thus, the Claimant is e1;2Atit1ed .1"d':*ee» compensation:

1) Pa1i'n_Vémd Rs. 50,000/--

ii) _..T\}-'!ed1i_je_a;_£ e3§p_en_seS_«-- :g Rs.1,12,000/~ iii] i 1;:1£::;1'ene:a1'ex-penss:s*._ Rs. 10,000/~ iV}.._ pf i:1_Cenie"d11_ring laid '"'{.J;:p peifi(;d"»._" Rs. 21,000/-- V) x ' Le'ssf:>_f' a_Ii'1eeri'i~1:ies' Rs. 15,000 / »» V} * Loss fu'ta__;fe.e'arning Ve3,pé1eity.disabi1ity Rs. 1,00,000 / ~

-- xii) "Ffum3:'e II'2ed"iea1 expenses Rs. 10,000/-

Total Rs. 3,36,0G0[-

Cross Objection 210/2008 is aliowed i'ri'««._pa1ji: 'afi'dA the judgment and award of the Tribunal is ..modified to the extent; stated herein above. The e'1aiman.t is entiﬂed for a totai e0mpe11sai;i0n of ":Rs.3,36.000/~ as eigaiilst. Rs.3,11,800/-- awarded by 10 the T1"ibu1"1a1 witth ini:e,1"est, at 6% pa. from the date of eiaim petition till the date ef realisation. 1'17. The Appeiiani, I'r1su_1'aI1ce Company is deposit the (tOT1'1p€HS€if1()I1 arnount, after . amount, if any. e.i.1"e21dy deposited,» w1'.th"i':1"i:e:fe,si'w.within""

two months from the date of r'eee1f'pi..--:'oI"ii:--1_ .{j';E7..&'{:§'ii_s judgment, and the same is_'c:Ifde1'ed to Vbe'v_disb2,.11fsed in-,"

terms ef the jtidgmetit and the"i'I'_ibun;5al. 18, In View of 211I<)w&?i:2;q the e.rQss§§3?ij€:{:t.§en filed by the Claimant by _enhan,ciiig-- the M.F.A. ﬂied tqhees.i5:1suffgine'e*ecxmpaﬁy for reduction does not survive and it

19. _ aInQi:--_nii~--._ deposit is directed ta be trV"%}:,i:Q;:S£T€a'£.I.L?'.C£ t0i}'ie~~'Fr"ibuna1 for disbursement in terms of V' ' e Tribu 11 a1.

2 t J z C;}tI' €I'1S OC'ObS Eeéﬁﬁ ?i1:: / A

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court