Karnataka High Court
R P Venkatesh S/O Puttaswami @ ... vs Karnataka Government Insurance ... on 14 November, 2013
Author: B.S.Indrakala
Bench: B.S.Indrakala
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.S.INDRAKALA
M.F.A.NO.4851/2009 (MV)
BETWEEN
R P VENKATESH
S/O PUTTASWAMI @ PUTTASWAMIGOWDA,
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
R/AT RAMDEVAPURA,
SALAGAME HOBLI,
HASSAN TALUK & DISTRICT. ... APPELLANT
(BY SMT KAVITHA H C & PRAKASHA H C, ADVS.)
AND
1. KARNATAKA GOVERNMENT
INSURANCE DEPARTMENT
MOTOR BRANCH,
BENGALOORU,
REPTD BY ITS DIRECTOR.
2. CHAIRMAN
DEPARTMENT OF STUDIES IN GEOLOGY,
MYSORE UNIVERSITY,
MYSORE. ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT M ELIZABETH, HCGP)
2
THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:
29.9.2007 PASSED IN MVC NO.1729/2006 ON THE
FILE OF THE ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE, MEMBER,
ADDL. MACT, HASSAN, PARTLY ALLOWING THE
CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING
ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS MFA COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS
DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The above appeal is filed against the judgment and award dated 29.9.2007 passed in MVC No.1729/2006 on the file of Addl. District Judge and Addl. MACT, Hassan.
2. It is the case of the claimant that on 18-9-2003, at about 8.00 p.m. while he was proceeding on a motor bike near Shambunathapura, the tempo trax bearing Regn. No.KA-09-1299 came from opposite direction in a rash manner, dashed against the motor bike and caused the accident. In the said accident, the claimant 3 sustained fracture of both the bones of right leg and other bodily injuries; he was taken to Sanjeevini Hospital at Hassan, where he was inpatient for two months and spent Rs.50,000/- towards medical expenses. Further it is contended that earlier to the accident, the claimant was working as an LIC agent earning an income of Rs.10,000/- p.m. and he was also doing agricultural work and animal husbandry, earning another sum of Rs.10,000/- p.m.; on account of the accident, he is disabled and unable to do any kind of work, etc. and has sought awarding of compensation.
3. In the statement of objections filed apart from denying the cause of the accident, nature of injuries suffered, the amount of expenditure said to have been incurred, it is pleaded by the insurer that the vehicle was covered with insurance and the liability if any, is subject to the terms and conditions thereon. 4
4. To prove his case, the claimant apart from getting himself examined as PW-1 has also chosen to examine the Medical Officer who assessed the disability, as PW-2 and got marked Exs.P1 to 14. On behalf of respondents, no oral evidence is adduced, however, a copy of the policy of insurance is got marked as Ex.R1.
5. On appreciation of the evidence so lead in, the Tribunal deemed it fit to award a sum of Rs.1,10,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization as compensation.
6. Aggrieved by the said judgment and award, the claimant is in appeal, interalia contending amongst other grounds that the amount of compensation so awarded is inadequate and seeks enhancement of the same.
5
7. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the amount awarded under the head pain and suffering is on the lower side and further he contends that the multiplier adopted is 16 while it ought to be 17 and seeks enhancement of compensation.
8. Per contra, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondent No.1, the Karnataka Govt. Insurance Department, submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the amount awarded is just and proper and the same does not call for any enhancement.
9. In view of the said submissions, the points that arise for consideration are:
i) Whether the impugned judgment and award dated 29.9.2007 passed in MVC No.1729/2006 on the file of the 6 Addl. District Judge and Addl. MACT, Hassan, is liable to be modified ?
ii) What order ?
10. The cause of the accident as well as the appellant sustaining certain injuries in the said accident are not in dispute. On perusal of the record, it is seen that appellant was an inpatient for about two months and he sustained fracture of both fibula and tibia of right leg and as such, it is reasonable to award Rs.30,000/- towards pain and suffering.
11. The appellant has also filed medical bills consolidatedly marked as Exs.P7 & 8 amounting to Rs.8,511/- and the appellant is entitled for the same.
12. In view of the fact that the claimant was inpatient for about two months, it is reasonable to 7 award Rs.20,000/- towards incidental expenses like transportation, attendant charges, food, nourishment etc.
13. The appellant was inpatient for two months, considering the nature of injuries and taking his income at Rs.4,500/- p.m. as held by the tribunal, which is proper, he is entitled for loss of income during the laid- up period of three months at Rs.13,500/-.
14. The percentage of disability assessed at 7% and so also the assessment of income at Rs.4,500/- p.m. by the Tribunal is just and proper. In the circumstances towards the loss of income on account of disability, the claimant is entitled to be compensated at Rs.4500x7/100x12x17=Rs.64,260/- and thus the appellant is entitled to be compensated as hereunder : 8
Pain and suffering Rs. 30,000/-
Incidental expenses like Rs. 20,000/-
transportation, attendant charges, etc. Medical expenditure Rs. 8,500/-
(Rs.8,511/-) rounded off Loss of income during laid Rs. 13,500/- up period (Rs.4500x3) Loss of income on account Rs. 64,260/-
of disability Loss of amenities and Rs. 25,000/- future enjoyment of life Total Rs.1,61,260/- Less: Compensation Rs.1,10,000/- awarded by Tribunal Balance Rs. 51,260/-
Thus, the impugned award and judgment dated 29.09.2007 passed in MVC No.1729/2006 is modified accordingly. Hence, the following order : 9
ORDER
i) The appeal is allowed in part by awarding a sum of Rs.1,61,260/- as against a sum of Rs.1,10,000/-
awarded by the tribunal with interest at 6% p.a. on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of the petition till realization.
ii) The respondent-Insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced amount with proportionate interest from the date of petition till realization within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
iii) On such deposit, out of the enhanced compensation of Rs.51,260/-, a sum of Rs.25,000/- with proportionate interest shall be invested in any of the Nationalized Bank of the choice of the claimant for a period of five years in his name with liberty to withdraw the periodical interest as and when the same accrues and the balance amount of Rs.26,260/- with 10 proportionate interest is ordered to be released in favour of the claimant for his immediate necessity.
Office to draw the award accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Ia