Karnataka High Court
Shrikant S/O Neelkanth Rathod vs North Eastern Karnataka Road Transport on 6 February, 2020
Author: S.R.Krishna Kumar
Bench: S.R.Krishna Kumar
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
MFA NO.200775/2019 (MV)
BETWEEN:
Shrikant S/o Neelkant Rathod
Age: 29 Years, Occ: Agriculture, Now Nil
R/o Mashal village (Hydra Tanda), Tq: Afzalpur
Dist: Kalaburagi, Now R/o at Plot No.21
Kotambri Layout, Shakti Nagar, Kalaburagi
... Appellant
(By Sri Nagaraj Patil, Advocate)
AND:
North Eastern Karnataka Road Transport
Corporation (NEKRTC) Central Offices
Sarige Sadan, Main Road, Kalaburagi - 585102
R/by its Officer
... Respondent
(By Smt. Sangeeta Bhadrashetty, Advocate)
This Miscellaneous First Appeal is filed under Section
173 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act praying to modify the
judgment and award dated 05.10.2018 passed in MVC
No.552/2017 on the file of II Additional Senior Civil Judge
and MACT Kalaburagi, C/C III Additional Senior Civil Judge
And MACT Kalaburagi and allow the appeal by enhancing
the compensation amount of Rs.14,99,999/- only as
claimed by the appellant before this Hon'ble Court.
2
This appeal coming on for further orders this day,
the Court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been filed by the claimant challenging the impugned judgment and award dated 05.10.2018 passed by the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Kalaburagi C/C III Additional Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Kalaburagi (for short 'the Tribunal'), in M.V.C.No.552/2017, awarding a sum of Rs.7,28,100/- together with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till realization towards the injuries sustained by the claimant-appellant in a road traffic accident that occurred on 31.10.2016.
2. Though the matter is listed for orders, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the same is taken up for final disposal.
3. Both the counsels submit that the occurrence of accident as well as the coverage of the policy of the offending vehicle by the Insurance company are not in 3 dispute and this appeal is restricted to quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that the Tribunal committed an error in taking the notional income of the claimant as Rs.7,000/- per month instead of Rs.8,750/- per month as per the Lok Adalath guidelines. It is also contended that having regard to the material on record, especially the evidence of the doctor (PW.2), Tribunal committed an error in coming to the conclusion that the disability incurred by the claimant to his entire body was only 15%. It is further contended that the amount awarded under the heads, 'loss of income during laid up period', 'loss of amenities', 'future medical expenses', 'pain and suffering' and 'diet, attendant charges and traveling expenses' are highly inadequate, in as much as, having regard to the serious nature of the injuries sustained by the appellant, he is entitled to an additional compensation under these heads also.
4
5. The learned counsel for the respondent- Insurance company would support the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
6. I have given my careful consideration to the rival submissions and perused the material on record.
7. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the appellant, the Tribunal failed to consider and appreciate the material on record including the unimpeached evidence of the doctor (PW.2), medical records and other evidence which clearly indicate that the permanent disability to the entire body of the claimant is to be taken as 22.5% as against 15% taken by the Tribunal. In the light of the Lok Adalat guidelines which stipulate that in respect of an accident that occurred in the year 2016, the notional income is to be taken as Rs.8,750/- per month. Hence, taking the notional income as Rs.8,750/- per month, the appellant would be entitled to total sum of Rs.4,01,625/- (Rs.8,750/- x 12 x 17 x 22.5/100) towards 'loss of future income'. Since the 5 Tribunal has already awarded compensation of Rs.2,14,200/-, the appellant would be entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.1,87,425/- under this head.
8. Insofar as the amount awarded towards 'pain and sufferings' is concerned, considering the nature of the injuries sustained by the appellant-claimant, I deem it proper to award an additional sum of Rs.40,000/- under this head. Further, the appellant is also entitled to additional compensation of Rs.20,000/- towards 'loss of amenities'. So also, appellant is entitled to an additional sum of Rs.16,500/- towards 'diet, attendant charges & traveling expenses'. The appellant would also be entitled to a sum of Rs.25,000/- towards 'future medical expenses'.
9. Having taken the notional income as Rs.8,750/- per month, I am of the view that the appellant is entitled to additional compensation of Rs.24,650/- under the head 'loss of income during laid up period'. 6
10. Thus, in all, the appellant is entitled to an additional enhanced compensation of Rs.3,13,575/- under the following heads:-
1 Future loss of income Rs.1,87,425/- 2 Pain and sufferings Rs.40,000/- 3 Loss of amenities Rs.20,000/- 4 Loss of income during Rs.24,650/-
laid up period 5 Diet, attendant Rs.16,500/-
charges & traveling expenses 6 Future Medical Rs.25,000/-
expenses
Total Rs.3,13,575/-
11. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I pass the following order:-
(i) The appeal is partly allowed.
(ii) The impugned judgment and award dated 05.10.2018 passed by the Tribunal in M.V.C.No.552/2017 is hereby modified.
(iii) The appellant-claimant is entitled to additional enhanced compensation of Rs.3,13,575/- which shall carry interest at 6% p.a. from the date of claim petition till realization.
7
(iv) The apportionment and disbursement to be done as per the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal.
Sd/-
JUDGE RSP