Karnataka High Court
Sri Nandeesh K vs United India Insurance Co Ltd on 23 June, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 KAR 2659
Author: S.Sunil Dutt Yadav
Bench: S. Sunil Dutt Yadav
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2020
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV
M.F.A. No.2155/2014 (MV)
Between:
Sri Nandeesh K.,
S/o Krishnappa
Aged about 21 years
Residing at No.21, 1st Main,
II Cross, Sonnegowda Layout,
Kodegehalli, Sahakaranagar,
Bangalore - 560 092. ... Appellant
(By Sri. Vinay Hegde, Advocate for
Sri S.V. Shastri, Advocate)
And:
1. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.,
No.484/2, Sadhu Chinnamma Building,
II Floor, SDM Temple Road,
Kumbara Street Cross,
Syndicate Bank, K.R. Puram,
Bangalore - 560 036.
2. Sri Uday Kumar,
S/o Ramalingachary
Residing at No.302,
Nagavara Palya, 5th Cross,
2
C.V. Raman Nagar,
Bangalore - 560 093. ... Respondents
(By Sri. Mohan Kumar T., Advocate for R1;
Notice to R2 is dispensed with v/o dated 12.07.2017)
This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act
against the judgment and award dated 06.03.2013
passed in MVC No.2886/2011 on the file of the XIX
Additional Small Causes Judge and XLI ACMM, MACT,
Bangalore, (SCCH No.17), partly allowing the claim
petition for compensation and seeking enhancement of
compensation.
This MFA coming on for Admission, this day, the
Court delivered the following:
JUDGMENT
The appellant who is the claimant before the Tribunal has filed this appeal being aggrieved by the award dated 06.03.2013 passed in MVC No.2886/2011, whereby the Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs.1,44,000/- as follows:
Sl. Particulars Compensation
No. Awarded
1 Towards Pain and Sufferings Rs. 45,000=00
2 Towards Medical Expenses Rs. 63,500=00
3
3 Towards Loss of Earnings Rs. 13,500=00
4 Towards Conveyance, Rs. 12,000=00
Attendant and Nourishing
Food
5 Towards discomfort loss of Rs. 10,000=00
amenities in life and future
unhappiness
TOTAL Rs.1,44,000=00
2. The facts in brief are that on 03.02.2011 at about 3.15 p.m., when the appellant/petitioner was driving his vehicle bearing registration No.KA-04/EX4414 from his residence towards Yelahanka to attend the interview, when he reached near Sahakarnagar Outpost Police Station, a car bearing registration No.KA-05/Z 8215 being driven in a rash and negligent manner collided with the petitioner's vehicle. It is stated that the petitioner fell down and suffered injuries. Immediately he was shifted to RMV Hospital where he underwent surgery and took medical treatment. The petitioner submits that he was working as an Accountant and was earning a sum of 4 Rs.15,000/- per month. Thereafter, the petitioner has filed the claim petition seeking compensation. The learned Tribunal on appreciating the oral and documentary evidence has awarded the compensation as aforestated.
3. The petitioner submits that the Tribunal has taken the income of the petitioner at Rs.4,500/- per month though the petitioner has produced the salary certificate issued by his employer M/s.MSV Network Private Limited as per Ex.P18 to show that he was being paid salary of Rs.15,000/- per month. The petitioner further submits that he has adduced the evidence of PW.3- Lakshmikanth, who is the employer in respect of proof of employment and salary. The petitioner submits that the Tribunal has quantified the loss of earnings during the laid up period at Rs.13,500/- which is on lesser side and the same needs to be enhanced. The petitioner submits that he has adduced the evidence 5 treating doctor viz., PW.2- Dr. Chandrashekar, Orthopaedic Surgeon of RMV Hospital, Bangalore. The evidence of PW.2 does indicate that even after the treatment, the petitioner is still undergoing certain inconveniences as he had difficulty in walking, standing for more than 30 minutes, not able to squat comfortably and had difficulty in climbing up staircase, which is reflected at Para 8 and 9 of the deposition of PW.2.
4. The learned counsel for petitioner further submits the compensation of Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal under the head 'Discomfort and loss of amenities' is meager and the same needs to be enhanced. It is also submitted that the Tribunal has not awarded compensation towards 'future medical expenditure' despite the Doctor having stated that the petitioner would require physiotherapy.
5. The learned counsel for the Insurer submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just 6 and proper and does not call for interference by this court.
6. Heard the learned counsels on both sides.
7. It has been contended by the insurer that despite Doctor having pointed out that petitioner has disability of 11% of the right lower limb 4% to the whole body, and observed in the affidavit that unless the petitioner is able to prove that the said disability has affected his earning capacity, he is not entitled for compensation under the head 'loss of future earnings' Reliance is rightly placed on the judgments of this court in the case of United India Insurance Co.Ltd. v. D.C.Rajanna and Another [ ILR 2000 KAR 3443] and North West Karnataka Road Transport Corporation v. Babu @ Babusab [ 2007 (1) KCCR 654]. This proposition is indeed correct position of law. Even in the present case, looking into the nature of work carried out by the petitioner, it cannot be stated that the 7 disability he has suffered would affect his loss of earning capacity.
7. Insofar as the submission of learned counsel for petitioner as regards the income of the petitioner, the Tribunal has taken the income at Rs.4,500/- per month. The Tribunal has disbelieved the assertion of the petitioner that he was drawing a salary of Rs.15,000/- per month and also asserted that the petitioner has not produced the documents pertaining to his educational qualification. However, in light of Ex.P18 though in cross-examination various other facts are elicited, but taking note of the fact that petitioner has completed PUC as per the marks card produced and also completed First Year B.Com as evidenced by Ex.P 13, it would be appropriate to take the income of the petitioner at Rs.10,000/- per month taking judicial notice of the income that an Accountant would earn. Accordingly, the loss of earning during the laid up period would appropriately be required to be enhanced. 8
8. Insofar as awarding compensation towards 'future medical expenditure, it is borne out from the evidence that implant has been removed after the surgery and he has to undergo physiotherapy and follow up treatment. Though there is no definite estimation of future medical expenses, it would be appropriate to award compensation of Rs.8,500/- under the head 'future medical expenditure'. Insofar as compensation awarded under the head 'pain and suffering', looking into the nature of injuries and surgery, the same is required to be enhanced by Rs.5,000/-. As regards awarding compensation for disability, in light of evidence of the Doctor at Para 8 and 9 of his affidavit, though the petitioner may not be entitled for compensation under the head 'future loss of income', however, in light of the evidence of the Doctor and taking note of the assertions made at Para 8 and 9, petitioner is entitled for enhancement of Rs.20,000/- as 9 regards the compensation awarded under the head 'loss of amenities'.
10. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part. The impugned judgment and award dated 06.03.2013, passed by the XIX Additional Sessions Judge & MACT, Bangalore (SCCH-17) in MVC No.2886/2011 is modified as under:
Compensation under As awarded As awarded different Heads by the by this Tribunal Court (Rs.) (Rs.) Towards Pain and Sufferings 45,000 50,000 Towards Medical Expenses 63,500 63,500 Towards loss of Earnings 13,500 30,000 Towards Conveyance, 12,000 12,000 Attendant and Nourishing Food Towards discomfort loss of 10,000 30,000 amenities in life and future unhappiness Towards future medical --- 8,500 expenditure TOTAL 1,44,000 1,94,000 10 Thus, the claimant is entitled to enhanced compensation of Rs.50,000/- payable with interest at 8% per annum as awarded by the Tribunal from the date of petition till the date of realization of amount. The respondent nos.2 and 3 shall deposit the enhanced compensation with accrued interest before the tribunal within four weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment and on such deposit, the same shall be disbursed to the claimant, on proper identification. However, the interest for the delayed period is disallowed as per the order dated 13.11.2017.
There shall be no order as to the costs. Office to draw the decree accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Np/-