Karnataka High Court
The Oriental Insurance Co Ltd vs Ravi S/O Aitha on 30 September, 2010
Bench: N.K.Patil, H.S.Kempanna
ex».
' ._By_ 1tse~R¢€§§na1 Qffice.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 30?" DAY OF SEPTEMBER,
:PRESENT:
TI-IE HoN*BLr: MRJUSTICE N,:;,é-.3113; '% ' "
AND
T§IE I-ION'BLE 1w1z.JUsTieE1:1;s.KE :y;r°A..N"N§&:"' ' ' ~ . "
M.F.A.No. 3345012' 2bo5_tI»m, 'V
cgw 3
M.F.A...§\fo. 4311 OF i2,0__()6[MVi"
+...........a
M.F'.A.No. 3340 OF 2006' '%
Between:
The Orientaj"I:i:s«ui*a1*£c;feVCg-',"Ltd."§' '
Having ,its'eRc;gijstei*e'dV» .Office_ at, ' '- . V
AsafA1i R0a_ds ' .~ V' «. . '
New Delhi and its ?£5:~1ngaIo1fe"'
Regionai' 'Office at.VLi~;Q' 'Shepjdinig
Compiex, Re_sid.enCy Roadfiiross,
Bang;:1ore~560._OO1.v" ' '
Repri3seri'ted by its'Regiona1 Manager,
'% V' -Theve-Mafigaiere I)iv1;éibi1a.1 Office of the
»Appe1la.r1t«C*Qmpany is now represented
. . . .Appe11ant
(By Sri. Raju, Advocate}
" S;10.Ai1:ha,
~fi'inciu, Male, Adult,
L
I\.J
New aged 23 years.
Represented by his Mother
Smt. Seethu, Residing at Arnmunje.
Saraswathi Nagar,
Post Koialagiri, Uppoor Viliage,
Udupi~576 £01.
(By Sri. K. Vishwanath Poojary, Advtacatei .. it 9
***¢%*$
9 L Re'spo"nd"e.nt 9' "
This MFA is filed U/S 1223(3) of 1V£V'Aetg e{g<§;i;:dst"' the 9'
judgment and award dated: 31'/'I2/2005"passed fgin MVC
N0.601/ 1999 on the fivieflpf the"Pr}._:CiVi1._Judge[&':r.E)n}, Addl.
MACT, Udupi, awarding ja1cc;m;gensat:o"n_of 29,99,300/--
with an interest at 6% }?.;A. £r«;,m.= the'~.date*. of petition tifi
payment and to set asidevvth,e'sa'me.u_ ' " Q =
M.F.A. N0.
Between:
Ravi, _ _
Aged about 23 years'-,.. _
Rep. by mother Seethu, _ "--
Aged ab0ut*5_V1 years, A' 9
W/0.1' Late Aitha,' " "
V. A_ Reskting at Ammi1nj_e_,_y .
V Sara svtrathit' Nagara",
Ko1.a1'gj.ri,yV Uppoor Village,
A ~..Ud.fup1" I)istr'1ct:~ . V V
....APIJe1Iant
(By-.$ri. _K;Vi$.-hwanatha Poojary, Advocate)
V"gPd'ld2 9'
Shetty,
-- Major,
S/ 0. Nandappa Shetty.
Residing at Hosamane,
L
/
Jappinamogru V
Mangalore,
Dakshina Kannada District.
2. Oriental Insurance Co., Ltd.,
Branch Off1'ce:Beauty Plaza
Balmatta Road, Mangalore. _
Rep. by its Divisional Manager, "
Divisional Office, Mangalore,
Dakshina Kannada District.'
3. Chandru.
S/ o. Anantha Shetty, '
R/o. Jadkai, .
Kundapura Taluk,
Udupi District. . -.
.c ' "...Resp0ndents
[By Sri. M. Sowri Raju, Advocate .fo~i:jR_2; - '
Notice to R1 and 'dispeiiised with V/"o--.r:3ated 06/ 02 / 2010)
This i\;i.mfi__i's_ filed' .11*/3(1)"; of MV Act against the
judgment i--and'~v._awai:d_ dated: 311.12/2005 passed in MVC
No.601,;/ 1999l'oi:*i ..tlj1e3ifi1e-.o'f~«the_ Frl. Civil Jiidge(Sr.Dn), Addl.
MACT, 'r..jUdu'pi, "p.ari1y.., al.lo"win"g the claim petition for
compensation and._see1<;ing-.enhancement of compensation.
These coining on for Hearing this day,
N.K.,,1fATII, J, delive_red. the following:
UUDGMENW
appeals by the Insurer and the
V .clai1iia.nt~«v:are.V' arising out of the same judgment and
dated 31/ i2/2005 passed in MVC No. em /1999
file of the Pr}. Civil Judge(Sr.Dri) and Addl. Motor
Accident Claims Tribunal, Udupi {hereinafter referred to
as ' Tribunal' for short).
2. The Tribunal by its judgment and award,rE1as
awarded a sum of $299,300/-- with interest at
the date of petition tiil payment as against theljdéc-iai1n"~made'
by the claimant for a sum of ?'l0,§i3,Od(:3(J','..5,"'.on' "6l,§.v3C*OVVL1fll:V'VtV)f
the injuries sustained by him in the rfoadltraffic l'
3. In brief, the facts of thecase are?'
The claimant was" aged .aBeui;« years atthle time of
the accident, hale and heailthy,-§var1;1f_ig,"_ae' Mason. That at
about 10.45 a:..m;,_, on Claimant Was
travelling as apillionpp in a bicycle near Kolalagiri
at KG. Roads on" that time, the bus bearing
Reg..E%j:!0'V.Ki£\/19V;4'2;EfiV5 came from Udupi side in a rash
negAligen:t'*--manner and dashed against the cycle, due
to down and sustained following injuries,
viz., 'superficial abrasions over dorsum of a1} fingers of
"{frigh't..,Ahand, over superior aspect of both shoulders,
olxfer dorsal aspect of left wrist. both knees and
Iaceration of 2 X 7cm over he face and upper
A
/
dentoalveder as per ex.P4«. Immediately, he was shifted
to KMC Hospital, Manipal, taken treatment as inpatient
for two days and thereafter, shifted to
hospital. Udupi, and spent reasonable ainoudnt M
medical expenses, conveyance fand'uothe1j. _iricidental'*VA
charges. On account of the
claimant in the said accident, 3 he
permanent disability. '."I§'ot;torVV--d"h._as assessed the
disability at 80% antiAV_it'v'iis'd in nature.
Therefore, claim petition
throughddhfis tiiedffribunal under section
166 of Wcompensatioli against the
respondents' Voiaim petition had Come up for
d if °eoriside5r"ation befovreddffthe Tribunal. The Tribunal after and after assessing the oral and doo;ui_me__!1ta.ij?Af evidence. has allowed the said claim part and awarded a sum ?2,99,300/-- as Jeofmpensation under different heads with interest at 6% f if from the date /ya' petition till payment. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award, the Insurer has filed M.F.A.No.3340/2006 contending that',-"the compensation awarded by the Tribunal underg_'4*all' V. heads is excessive and it requires to be reduced the claimant through his r11other'; filed-:' 43 1 1/2006 contending that._.the corn:pensati'o'n_ lglawarded it by the Tribunal is inadequatefiand it" .:requires be enhanced.
4. We have heard co'unse:l._appearing for the Insurer an_d4l(ja;i*ned. counsel avpjfiearing for claimant. thelvlvniaterials available on record, E"in'c'luvdi'ng".the"iifnpugned judgment and award passed by emerges that, the occurrence A the iaecident the injuries sustained by the 'V'e.1ai,mar1t:"in"the_lsaid accident are not in dispute. It is the easeV__v~0f.ti1Ae claimant that he was aged about 22 hale and healthy working as mason and on , of the injuries sustained by him in the accident are-iihas taken treatme1%s inpatient for two days and / due to his financial constraints he Could not continue his treatment. The Tribunal after assessing oral."-and documentary evidence and {:he nature sustained by the claimant, has awarded °<'20,000/-- towards pain a.nd ;suMffe1'i1j1gs, .3 towards medical expenses. cyonveyance, nourishing ilaod V' a.nd attendant charges, unhappiness and los.;s:'~o_f t?'V2',A5v9v,2O()/~. /f1/16' Said cornpeynsation Tribunal is inadequate The Tribunal ha.s of the claimant a.t ?'1,50() same is on lower side and it needs tokbe enhanced. Having regard to the age, doecuepation "and themsince the accident was occurred in re-assess his income at ?2,»-100/-- per month. yiew of the injuries sustained by the the ha.s suffered permanent disability. The has assessed the disability at 80% and it is permanent in naturefllhe Tribunai has taken the I M/__»_,___,«,_,.--
4"
disability at 80% for calculating loss of future income and the same is on higher side and it needs to__ be modified. The Doctor has assessed the disability. and 1/ 3*" of the same is to be taken as'?whole.: H disability. The 1 /3"' of 80% comes to26% and according1y;«' is taken as whole body disability inst'eya(::1--.;l/3lf'805/.6 p._;;s- 4-axes' the Tribunal. The appropriate V3/l1.]#ll't'i'xvl1'3pli(3I'.;.S2\2'1'..l1. hel'j'}_18l7slncellthe ll claimant was aged about «Of.,aC.¢§1dent_ 11; is not in dispute that, on sustained by the claimantglhe inpatient for two days. six months and during have undergone pain and agony amount towards conveyance and Qtlier. incidentall charges. But all these aspects of the not been considered or appreciated by the Trildtinai awarding compensation under these heads. _ Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we awarpd a" sum of ?30,000/-- towards pain and suffering dnstead of ?'20,000/--; ?'10,000/-- towards medical expenses, " -conveyance, nourishinfiod and attendant charges instead M of ?7.100/--; ?14,400/~« towards loss of income during the period of treatment for six months insteagi of $3,000/--, '<'20.000/« towards Ioss of amer1ities._'"of'f.iife instead of ?10,000/ -- and a sum of ?1,34,784A4'/':~ * x 12 x 18 x 26/too) towards 1oss._of instead of "€259,200/--.
6. Having regard to the"fa,ets 0' of the case as stated above, '..the-..i_tn.1'5t:gned 0' judgment and award passed by the Triabagiattliaotletteibe modified. The total compensatitfii vpayaibtet:beo.a1es"to_--._§'2;'O9«,i84/- and the break fotiiliowrs f ' ~ .
Towardspain and st1i1"fefings..4 3 30,000 /- Towards 'medical; = V ";expenses, 3' 10,000/-- conveyance' *nourishir1_g 'food and attendant. charges"
.'1'owafds;_A«-t.A loss of income during the ? 14,400/~ period of treatnrtent 0Towa1'ds'--vloss"o.f amenities of life a' 20,000» Tr_)wards"lo'_ss offiiture income Q' 30,34,784/-- ' * rota; ? 2,09,184/-
Accordingly, the appeal filed by the insurer is
-- ctisqfiosed of and the appe%fi1ec1 by the claimant is allowed '_w_,",,_,..,...
/ 10 in part and the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal in MVC No.60l/1999 is hereby modified, awarding compensation of ?2,09,184/- instead_r"o_f 32,99,300/--. The reduced compensation comes to _ The Insurer is directed to deposit the l "
?2,09,i84/~« with interest at 6% 't1¢ie.:
petition till the date of realisation, threevtweelgs the date of receipt of a copy of The manner of tlie"'I'ribunal is proportionately reduced to ofvvtiieivbréduction of the compensation by C();!_11'"Eg The stattitory _tlieVVVlnsurer shall be transmitted to the uconce1ned:.l:T1'1'ibun'aE immediately. Draw the acc'ordin.'gly.« ll Sd/4 Iudgé sa/4,"
Tudge