Bangalore District Court
Mohammed Asif vs Arunachala Logistics Pvt Ltd on 20 May, 2025
KABC020332142023
BEFORE THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL
COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, AT BENGALURU. (SCCH-_25)
-: PRESENT:-
SMT. PRAKRITI KALYANPUR, B.A(L),LL.B., LL.M.
XXIII Additional Small Causes Judge, Bengaluru.
DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF MAY 2025
MVC No.7019/2023
PETITIONER : Sri. Mohammed Asif
S/o Faizulla
Aged about 27 years,
R/at Kottagere Village & Hobli,
Kunigal Taluk, Tumakur Dist.
(By Sri. G.P.Shivaprasad,
Advocate.)
RESPONDENT/S : 1. M/s Arunachala Logistics Pvt. Ltd.,
R/o No.101/5, 101/8,
H. Aladhahalli Village, Shanthi Grama,
Hassan Taluk & District - 573 201.
(Sri.M.K.Venkatesh, Advocate.)
2. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd.,
Mahalakshmi Chambers,
2nd Floor No.9, MG Road,
Bangalore - 560 025.
(By Sri. Indira Prakash, Advocate.)
SCCH-25 2 MVC No.7019/2023
JUDGMENT
The Petitioner has filed this petition under Sec.166 of the M.V. Act, seeking compensation of Rs.25,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by him in a road traffic accident dated 25.07.2023.
2. The case of the Petitioner in brief is that, On 25.07.2023 at about 1.30pm while the petitioner was riding his Two wheeler bearing Reg.No.KA-06-HQ-5474 from Kunigal side towards Tumakur side, on SH-33, TM Road, Near Muneshwara Temple, Doddakere Yeri, Kunigal Taluk, Tumakur District, an Eicher Goods vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-13-C-8694 came from Tumakur side towards Kunigal side with a high speed in a rash and negligent manner and came to the extreme right side of the said road and dashed against petitioner's two wheeler and caused the accident. Due to this accident petitioner fell down and suffered injuries.
3. It is the further case of the petitioner that, immediately after the accident he was shifted to CHC Kunigal, SCCH-25 3 MVC No.7019/2023 provided first aid and thereafter shifted to Prolife Hospital, Bengaluru, admitted as an inpatient for a period of 14 days, underwent surgery and discharged with advice to take follow up treatment periodically. So far he has spent Rs.5,00,000/- towards medical expenses, conveyance, nourishment and attendant expenses etc., Prior to the date of accident, he was hale and healthy, doing Labor Work and earning more than Rs.20,000/- per month. Due to accidental injuries, he has become permanently and completely disabled and bedridden and could not resume his avocation till date. The accident was caused solely due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of Eicher Goods vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-13-C-8694. The Kunigal Police registered case against the driver of the offending vehicle in Cr.No.252/2023 p/u/Sec.279, 337 of IPC. The respondent No.1 being the RC owner and the respondent No.2 being the Insurer of the offending vehicle are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the petitioner. Hence this petition.
SCCH-25 4 MVC No.7019/2023
4. In response to notice issued by this Tribunal, the Respondents appeared through their respective counsels and filed separate written statements.
5. The objection of the respondent No.1.
It has denied the entire petition averments except admitting the ownership of the Eicher bearing Reg.No.KA-13- C-8694 and all the records relating to the said vehicle are standing in the name of the Respondent No.1. It has further admitted that the vehicle was insured with the 2 nd respondent vide policy No.61290031220300002728 valid from 25.02.2023to 24.02.2024. Further submitted that, the driver of the R-1 vehicle was having valid and effective DL and having valid permit. It has contended that the compensation claimed by the petitioner is highly excessive and exorbitant. Therefore, prayed for dismissal of the petition against it.
6. The objection of the respondent No.2.
It has denied the entire averments of the petition except admitting the issuance of insurance policy No.61290031220300002728 in respect of the Eicher Goods vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-13-C-8694 in favour of the 1 st SCCH-25 5 MVC No.7019/2023 respondent. There is non compliance of Sec.134(c) and 158(6) of MV Act. It has denied the manner of accident and involvement of the vehicle in the accident. It has contended that the accident was caused due to the negligence on the part of the petitioner/rider of the motorcycle. The driver of the said offending vehicle did not have valid DL as on the date of accident. Further it has denied age, occupation, earning and contended that the compensation claimed by the petitioner is excessive. Therefore the petition is liable to be dismissed.
7. On the above rival contentions of the parties, this court has framed the following issues:-
1. Whether the Petitioner proves that, the accident occurred on 25.07.2023 at 1.30pm, due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of Eicher Goods vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-13-C-8694 and in the said accident petitioner sustained injuries?
2. Whether the Petitioner is entitled for Compensation? If so, what is the quantum? From whom?
3. What order or award?SCCH-25 6 MVC No.7019/2023
8. The Petitioner in order to prove his case has examined himself as PW.1 and got marked Exs.P.1 to P.11. Dr.Shailesh A.V. Rao got examined as PW.2 and got marked Exs.P.12 to P.17. On the other side, the Respondents did not examine any witness nor produced any documents on their behalf.
9. Heard the arguments and perused the materials on record.
10. On hearing both sides and perusal of the evidence on record this court answers the above issues as follows:-
Issue No.1: In the Affirmative,
Issue No.2: In the Affirmative,
Issue No.3: As per the final order,
for the following:-
REASONS
11. Issue No.1:-
In order to prove that the accident occurred due to the actionable negligence on the part of the driver of the Eicher Goods vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-13-C-8694, the petitioner has examined himself as PW.1 and produced 6 documents as SCCH-25 7 MVC No.7019/2023 per Exs.P.1 to P.6. He has reiterated the contents of the petition in his affidavit filed in lieu of his chief examination. During the cross examination of PW.1, nothing worthwhile is elicited. The Respondent No.2 denied the occurrence of the accident and involvement of the Eicher Goods vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-13-C-8694 in the accident. Further contended that the accident caused due to the sole negligence of the petitioner himself.
12. The FIR was registered on the same day of the accident i.e., on 25.07.2023 on the complaint of petitioner's father as per Ex.P.1. Spot Mahazar at Ex.P.2 conducted on the same day of the accident i.e., on 25.07.2023 between 4.00 and 4.45pm. The Sketch at Ex.P.3 shows that the accident occurred on Tumkur - Kunigal Main Road. The vehicle seizure mahazar at Ex.P.4 conducted on the same day of the accident between 5.00pm and 6.00pm. The IMV report at Ex.P.5 shows that the Eicher Goods vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-13-C-8694 got damages to its right side Wheel Guard bent inward. Similarly petitioner's motorcycle bearing No.KA-06-HQ-5474 got damaged to its front wheel guard bent inwards, front right SCCH-25 8 MVC No.7019/2023 side shape pressed, both side head lights indicators, left doom, both side rear view mirror, right side riders foot panel, rear right side shield pipe broken and dislocated, both side steering handles bent down and damaged, rear brake light, rear both side indicators dislocated. Ex.P.6 Charge sheet filed after thorough investigation against the driver of the offending Eicher Goods vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-13-C-8694. As against these documents, the respondents did not produce any documents. Therefore on perusal of all the documents, the Tribunal holds that the accident was caused due to the rash and negligent driving by the driver of the Eicher Goods vehicle bearing Reg.No.KA-13-C-8694. Accordingly, issue No.1 is held in the affirmative.
13. Issue No.2:-
In order to prove the injuries and disability suffered by the petitioner, the petitioner has produced a letter from Prolife Multi Specialty Hospital as per Ex.P.7. As per Ex.P.7, the Petitioner has suffered head injury and Polytrauma which are grievous in nature.
14. In this regard, the petitioner has got examined SCCH-25 9 MVC No.7019/2023 Dr.Shailesh A.V. Rao as PW.2. He has deposed that the petitioner was diagnosed with GCS of E1VtM4. He also had a lacerated parietal wound. CT brain revealed left frontal hemorrhagic contusion with depressed right parietal bone fracture. He was treated with medications and mechanical ventilation and discharged on 06.08.2023 with a GCS of E4VaM6. He complains of frequent headaches, giddiness and tiredness and also impaired memory and impaired intelligence. He reportedly has blurring of vision on left side along with slurred speech and weakness of left side. He had poor vision on left side of visual field. He had slurred speech along with left sided spastic weakness. He was ambulant with a limp. PW.2 further stated that on skull X-ray revealed a depressed fracture on right parietal bone. He has assessed neuro disability of around 20% and is pertaining to whole body. The disability is likely to be permanent. He has also produced Exs.P.12 to 17 i.e., OPD records, X-ray report, CT brain report, Ophthalmologist opinion, Neuro psychological assessment report and Mini mental state examination report. During his cross examination he has stated that he has not treated the petitioner. The petitioner sustained right parietal SCCH-25 10 MVC No.7019/2023 wound, depressed bone fracture, left frontal contusion. Petitioner has taken conservative treatment and has not undergone any neurological surgery. Further stated that he has produced ophthalmologist report to show poor vision of the left eye. The petitioner has IDEA score of less than 40%. The petitioner claims to be a Laborer. He has stated that he has memory loss and blurred vision. Therefore, on the basis of evidence of PW.2, this Tribunal deems it fit to fix the whole body disability at 18%.
Monthly income:
15. The Petitioner has deposed in his evidence that, he was Working as a Laborer and earning Rs.20,000/- per month. In support of this he has not produced any documents like bank statement etc., nor examined any witness. The accident occurred in the year 2023. Therefore, this court deems it fit to fix the notional income of the deceased at Rs.16,000/- per month.
16. At the time of accident the Petitioner was aged about 27 years as could be made out from Ex.P.11/Notarized copy of Aadhar Card. He was hale and healthy before the SCCH-25 11 MVC No.7019/2023 accident. Keeping all the above things in mind, Petitioner is entitled to the following compensation:-
i) PAIN AND SUFFERING:-
After the accident, the Petitioner was shifted to CHC Kunigal and thereafter shifted to Prolife Hospital, Bengaluru, admitted as an inpatient for a period of 14 days and later he was shifted to KG Hospital, underwent surgery and discharged with advice to take follow up treatment periodically. Considering that the nature of injuries he has undergone are grievous, the Petitioner is awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- under this head.
ii) MEDICAL EXPENSES:
The Petitioner has pleaded that he has spent Rs.5,00,000/- towards treatment, medicines, conveyance, food and nourishment and other incidental expenses etc. In this regard, the petitioner has produced medical bills for a sum of Rs.2,67,772/- as per Ex.P.10. There is no contrary evidence produced by the Respondent. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for the said amount under this head. SCCH-25 12 MVC No.7019/2023
iii) LOSS OF INCOME DURING LAID UP PERIOD:-
As mentioned above the petitioner has sustained grievous injuries. In this regard petitioner has not produced discharge summary of above said hospital wherein the petitioner was treated as an inpatient. Therefore, considering the nature of injuries it can be said that the Petitioner may have required at least Two months time for recovering from the injuries suffered by him. Hence, he is entitled only for a sum of Rs.32,000/- under this head.
iv) LOSS OF FUTURE INCOME:-
On perusal of Ex.P.11, the date of birth of the petitioner is 01.02.1996 and the date of accident is 25.07.2023. Therefore, as on the date of the accident the Petitioner's age is 27 years. As per the dictum laid down in Sarala Verma's case, the appropriate multiplier applicable to his age is 17.
As such the petitioner is entitled to Rs.5,87,520/- (Rs.16,000/- x 12 x 18% x 17 = Rs.5,87,520/- ).
(v) LOSS OF FUTURE AMENITIES AND
HAPPINESS:-
The Petitioner was aged about 27 years at the time of accident. He has sustained grievous injuries and as per SCCH-25 13 MVC No.7019/2023 consideration of this Tribunal, he is suffering from 18% functional disability. The Petitioner has to suffer this disability throughout his life. Because of this he will have to lose some of the amenities and comforts. Therefore, considering the age and nature of injuries that the Petitioner has suffered, a sum of Rs.20,000/- is awarded under this head.
(vi) ATTENDANT, CONVEYANCE, FOOD AND NOURISHMENT CHARGES:
After the accident, the Petitioner was treated in the above said hospitals, admitted as an inpatient and discharged with advise. However, during this period he must have spent considerable amount on his food and nourishment, conveyance and attendant expenses. Therefore, the Petitioner is entitled for a sum of Rs.20,000/- under this head.
17. The Petitioner is entitled to compensation under the following heads:
1. Pain & suffering Rs.1,00,000/-
2. Medical expenses Rs.2,67,772/-
3. Loss of income during laid up period Rs.32,000/-
4. Loss of future income Rs.5,87,520/-
5. Loss of future amenities and Rs.20,000/- happiness
6. Attendant, conveyance, food and Rs.20,000/-
nourishment charges TOTAL Rs.10,27,292/-
SCCH-25 14 MVC No.7019/2023If it is rounded off it comes around Rs.10,27,300/- and same is awarded to the Petitioner.
Liability
18. The Respondents have not proved their defence as discussed above. Therefore, the Respondents being the RC owner and the Insurer of the offending vehicle are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the Petitioner. However, as the policy existed as on the date of accident, the respondent No.2/insurer has to indemnify the respondent No.1/insured and has to pay compensation awarded to the petitioner. The Petitioner has claimed for a sum of Rs.25,00,000/- but he is entitled only for a sum of Rs.10,27,300/- with interest @ 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization. Therefore, the petition needs to be allowed. Accordingly, Issue No.2 is held in the affirmative.
19. Issue No.3:-
For the reasons and discussions made above and finding to the above issues, this Tribunal proceeds to pass the following:-SCCH-25 15 MVC No.7019/2023
ORDER The petition is allowed with cost. The Petitioner is entitled for compensation of Rs.10,27,300/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Twenty Seven Thousand and Three Hundred only) from the Respondents along with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of depositing the amount. The respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the said compensation to the petitioner.
However, the Respondent No.2/Insurer is directed to deposit the compensation amount with interest before this Tribunal within sixty days from the date of this award.
On deposit of compensation and interest, 25% shall be deposited in the name of the petitioner for a period of 3 years in any Bank of his choice and remaining amount shall be released in favour of the Petitioner by way of e- payment on proper identification and due acknowledgment as per rules.SCCH-25 16 MVC No.7019/2023
Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.1,000/-. Draw decree accordingly.
(Dictated to the stenographer on line, revised, corrected and then pronounced in the open court this the 20th day of May 2025) (PRAKRITI KALYANPUR) XXIII ASCJ, MEMBER MACT, Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE List of Witnesses examined for Petitioner:
PW.1 Mr. Mohammed Asif PW.2 Dr. Shailesh A.V. Rao
List of Documents marked for Petitioner:
Ex.P1 True copy of FIR and complaint
Ex.P2 True copy of Spot mahazar
Ex.P3 True copy of Spot sketch
Ex.P4 True copy of Seizure mahazar
Ex.P5 True copy of IMV report
Ex.P6 True copy of charge sheet
Ex.P7 Letter from Profile Multi Specialty Hospital
Ex.P8 Discharge medicine prescriptions
Ex.P9 Medical prescriptions 26 in Nos.
Ex.P10 Medical bills 18 in Nos.
Ex.P11 Notarized copy of Adhaar card (compared
with original and same is returned)
Ex.P12 OPD records
Ex.P13 X-ray report
SCCH-25 17 MVC No.7019/2023
Ex.P14 CT Brain report
Ex.P15 Ophthalmologist opinion
Ex.P16 Neuro psychological Assessment report
Ex.P17 Mini Mental state Examination report
List of Witnesses examined for Respondent/s:
--Nil--
List of documents exhibited for Respondent:
- NIL --
(PRAKRITI KALYANPUR) XXIII ASCJ, MEMBER MACT, Bengaluru.