Karnataka High Court
Ramaiah B T vs Jagadeesh P on 1 December, 2021
Author: H.T.Narendra Prasad
Bench: H.T.Narendra Prasad
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2021
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.T.NARENDRA PRASAD
MFA No.7519 OF 2019(MV)
BETWEEN:
Ramaiah B.T.,
S/o Thimmasiddaiah,
Now aged about 62 years,
R/at Residing at Budhihal,
Kasaba Hobli, Nelamangala Taluk,
Bengaluru Rural District. ... Appellant
(By Sri. Rangegowda N.R., Advocate)
AND:
1. Jagadeesh P.,
S/o Puttarudraiah,
Aged Major,
R/at Kodagadala,
Puravara Hobli,
Madhugiri Taluk,
Tumkur District.
2. HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company,
No.2, 2nd Floor,
Shankaranarayana Building
M.G.Road, Bangalore-560 001. ... Respondents
(By Sri. B.pradeep, Advocate for R2:
Notice to R1 is D/w
V/o dated: 01.12.2021)
2
This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act,
against the Judgment and Award dated:01.06.2019 passed
in MVC No.6456/2017 on the file of the 9th Additional
Small Causes Judge, & XXXIV ACMM, Court of Small
Causes and Member, MACT-7, Bangalore, partly allowing
the claim petition for compensation and seeking
enhancement of compensation.
This MFA, coming on for orders, this day, this 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 claimant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 01.06.2019 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bangalore (SCCH-7) in MVC No.6456/2017.
2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 24.07.2017 at about 3.30 p.m., the claimant was standing on the left side of the road on Doddaballapura - Nelamangala road near Basavanahalli Cross, Nelamangala Rural District. At 3 that time, the rider of the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-64/K-6543 rode the same at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner dashed to the claimant. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized.
3. The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation. It was pleaded that he spent huge amount towards medical expenses, conveyance, etc. It was further pleaded that the accident occurred purely on account of the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.
4. On service of notice, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 appeared through counsel and filed separate written statements in which the averments made in the petition were denied. The age, avocation and 4 income of the claimant and the medical expenses are denied. It was pleaded that the quantum of compensation claimed by the claimant is exorbitant. Hence, they sought for dismissal of the petition.
5. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded the evidence. The claimant himself was examined as PW-1 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P15. On behalf of the respondents, two witnesses were examined as RW-1 and RW-2 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.R1 to Ex.R8. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver, as a result of which, the claimant sustained injuries. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.20,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. 5 and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.
6. The learned counsel for the claimant has contended that due to the accident the claimant has suffered grievous injuries, he was inpatient for a period of 3 days. He has spent Rs.5,439/- towards medical expenses. The overall compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.20,000/- is on the lower side. Hence, he sought for allowing the appeal.
7. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company has contended that the injuries suffered by the claimant are minor in nature, he was inpatient for only 3 days. He has not examined the doctor. Considering the injuries suffered by the claimant the overall compensation 6 awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.
8. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Perused the judgment and award and the original records.
9. It is not in dispute that the claimant suffered injuries in the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.
Due to the accident the claimant has suffered fracture of 4th metacarpal with multiple wound over ring and middle finger, abrasions over face forehead, nose abrasion over right knee. He was inpatient for a period of 10 days and he has spent Rs.5,439/- for medical expenses. Considering the injures suffered by the claimant and considering the age and avocation, I am of the opinion that in addition to the compensation 7 awarded by the Tribunal, a sum of Rs.30,000/- has to be awarded.
The Insurance Company is directed to deposit Rs.50,000/- along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.
To the aforesaid extent, the judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The Tribunal is directed to release the entire compensation amount to the claimant after due verification.
Sd/-
JUDGE Cm/-