Karnataka High Court
Sri Vikas M vs National Insurance Company Ltd on 25 July, 2014
Author: N.Ananda
Bench: N.Ananda
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2014
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANANDA
M.F.A.No.136/2013(MV)
BETWEEN:
SRI VIKAS M
S/O MADDIREDDY .M
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
R/A NO.2GC-628, 6TH MAIN ROAD
2ND BLOCK, H R B R LAYOUT
KALYANAGARA, BANGALORE-43 .. APPELLANT
(By Sri: S G HEGDE. ADV)
AND
1. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD
MARATHAHALLI BRANCH OFFICE
NO.86/80, 2nd FLOOR, OLD AIRPORT ROAD
MARATHAHALLI, BANGALORE-037
(POLICY NO.602202/31/10/6200001197)
VEHICLE BEARING NO.KA 51 H 7472
2. M/S TRENDS AD FILM MAKERS PVT LTD
3RD CROSS, KADABISANAHALLI
OPP SARJAPUR RING ROAD POST
PANTHUR, BANGALORE-87 ... RESPONDENTS
(By Sri: C.M. POONACHA. ADV FOR LEXPLEXUS, ADVS. FOR R1
Sri: MAHESH.L ADV FOR R2)
THIS APPEAL IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST
THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 21.9.2012 PASSED IN
MVC NO.4793/2010 ON THE FILE OF XX ADDITIONAL JUDGE
& XVIII ACMM, BANGALORE (ACMM-18), PARTLY ALLOWING
THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION WITH INTEREST & ETC.
2
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The claimant has filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation.
2. The insurance company has satisfied the award. Therefore, the only question that would arise for determination in this appeal is:
Whether the claimant is entitled to enhancement of compensation ?
3. I have heard Sri.S.G.Hegde, learned counsel for claimant and Sri.C.M.Poonacha, learned counsel for insurance company.
4. The claimant had suffered fractures of right tibia and fibula at middle 1/3rd and he was treated in Hosmat Hospital at Bangalore. He was operated for reduction of fractures.
5. The claimant was aged about 23 years at the time of accident. He was working as a Software Engineer in 3 M/s.Health Asyst Private Limited. During the period of treatment, he was away from the work. The certificate issued by his employer does not indicate that his absence was treated as leave without salary. The claimant continues to work in the same company without therebeing any reduction in rank or salary.
6. The tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.1,08,800/- under following heads:
Pain and suffering - Rs.75,000 Transportation charges - Rs. 2,000 Special food and nutrition etc - Rs. 900
Loss of amenities of life, frustration, Disappointment, inconvenience etc. - Rs.10,000 Medical expenses - Rs.20,000 Attendant charges - Rs. 900 Total - Rs.1,08,800
7. On hearing learned counsel for parties and after going through evidence and the impugned award, I find that compensation awarded by the tribunal under the head 'loss of amenities' is inadequate. The tribunal has not made provision for 'future medical expenditure'. The tribunal has not awarded adequate compensation towards 'conveyance, 4 food and nourishment and attendant charges'. Therefore, compensation awarded by the tribunal is modified as follows:
Pain and suffering - Rs.75,000 Loss of amenities and enjoyment of life - Rs.50,000
Transportation charges, food and nourishment- Rs.10,000 Medical expenditure (present) - Rs.20,000 Future medical expenditure - Rs.20,000 Total - Rs.1,75,000 Thus, claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.1,75,000/- as against compensation of Rs.1,08,800/- awarded by the tribunal.
8. In the result, I pass the following:
ORDER
(i) The appeal is accepted in part.
(ii) The impugned award is modified by enhancing compensation of Rs.1,08,800/- to Rs.1,75,000/-
(iii) The rest of the impugned award is confirmed.
SD/-
JUDGE Np/-