Bangalore District Court
Harinarayan Udaynarayan Tiwari Alias ... vs Prathibha L on 10 January, 2024
SCCH-14 1 MVC.2743/2020
KABC020130692020
BEFORE MOTOR VEHICLES ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL,
BANGALORE CITY.
SCCH14
Dated : This the 10th day of January 2024
Present : SRI. YATHISHA.R.
B.A.L.,L.L.B., ,
MEMBER, MACT,
XVI ADDL. JUDGE,
COURT OF SMALL CAUSES,
BENGALURU.
MVC No.2743/2020
Petitioner: Harinarayan Udaynarayan
Tiwari @ Harish Tiwari,
S/o Udaynarayan Tiwari,
Aged about 22 years.
Residing at:
Hennagara Gate,
Bommasandra, Attibele,
Anekal Taluk,
Bengaluru Urban.
Native Address:
SCCH-14 2 MVC.2743/2020
Room No.8, Subhash Chawl,
Sidharth Nagar, Ganesh Chowk,
Kandivali West, Mumbai,
Maharashtra - 400 067.
(By Sri.A. Sreenivasaiah, Adv)
Vs.
Respondents : 1.Prathibha L.,
W/o Raghu G.R.,
Ward No.27, 5th cross,
Ashok Nagar,
Tumkur 572 101,
Karnataka.
(Exparte)
2.The Manager,
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.,
5th floor, Centenary Building,
No.28, M.G. Road,
Bengaluru - 560 001.
(By Sri.H.T. Venkataraju, Adv)
:JUDGMENT:
This Claim Petition is filed by the Petitioner against the Respondents under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act seeking Compensation of Rs.30,00,000/ for the injuries SCCH-14 3 MVC.2743/2020 sustained in the Road Traffic accident.
2. The substance of averments made in the Petition is as under:
That on 28102019 at about 4.00 p.m., when the Petitioner was riding a Motorcycle bearing Reg. No.KA03HT 2729 towards Bommasandra and when he reached in front of Trimurthy Factory, Bommasandra Industrial Area, at that point of time, the driver of the Lorry bearing Reg. No.AP24TB0819 has drove the same in a rash and negligent manner, lost control and dashed against the petitioner's motorcycle. Due to the tremondous impact, the Petitioner sustained grievous injuries. Immediately after the accident, the Petitioner was taken to Suhas Hospital, for first aid treatment and thereafter he was shifted to Sparsh Hospital, Bengaluru wherein, he took treatment as an inpatient. He has spent more than Rs.2,00,000/ towards medical treatment, conveyance and the incidental expenses.
3. Prior to the accident, the Petitioner was hale and SCCH-14 4 MVC.2743/2020 healthy and was aged 22 years and he was a student apart from that he was working as Paper Delivery Boy and was earning Rs.20,000/ per month. Due to the accident, he has sustained grievous injuries causing permanent disablement.
4. The Respondent No.1 is the owner of the offending lorry and the Respondent No.2 is the insurer of the lorry and therefore, both Respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation to the Petitioner. Hence, this Petition.
5. In spite of service of notice, the Respondent No.1 has not appeared before the court, hence she has been placed exparte.
In pursuance of service of notice to the Respondent No.2 appeared before the court through its counsel and filed objections to the main petition.
In the Objection Statement of Respondent No.2, it denied the age, avocation and income of the Petitioner and also denied the accident caused by the rash and negligent driving by the SCCH-14 5 MVC.2743/2020 driver of the lorry. Further it has denied the injuries sustained by the Petitioner in the accident and the expenses incurred for the medical treatment. This respondent has admitted the issuance of insurance policy in respect of alleged offending vehicle. Further, it has denied that, the alleged offending lorry was not at all involved in the alleged accident and there is no rash and negligent act on the part of its driver. Further this respondent has contended that the alleged accident occurred due to rash and negligent riding of the rider of motorcycle/claimant with two pillion riders and the owner and insurer of the motorcycle are necessary parties to the claim petition. Further, it contended that the driver of lorry had no valid and effective driving licence to drive and the owner of lorry knowingly entrusted the vehicle to a person who had no valid and effective driving licence to drive the vehicle and contended that at the time of alleged accident, the offending vehicle was plied without valid permit and fitness certificate. Hence, among SCCH-14 6 MVC.2743/2020 these and other grounds, Respondent No.2 has prayed to dismiss the petition against it.
6. On the basis of the above pleadings, my learned predecessor has framed the following Issues.
ISSUES
1. Whether the Petitioner proves that he sustained grievous injuries in the nature of permanent disablement on 28.10.2019 at about 4.00 p.m. in front of Trimurthy factory, Bommasandra Industrial Area, Anekal Taluk, Bengaluru, in an accident arising due to rash and negligent driving of driver of lorry bearing No.AP24TB 0819?
2. Whether the petitioner is entitled for the compensation? If so, how much and from whom?
3. What Order or Award?
SCCH-14 7 MVC.2743/2020
7. In order to substantiate the case of the Petitioner, the Petitioner got examined himself as P.W.1 and got marked 14 documents as per Ex.P.1 to P.14. He also examined one witness as P.W.2 and got marked 4 documents as per Ex.P15 to P18 and closed his side evidence. On the other hand, the Respondent No.2 got examined a witness as RW.1 and got marked 2 documents as per Ex.R.1 and R.2 and closed its side evidence.
8. The Learned Counsel for Petitioner has relied on the decisions reported as under;
1. 2019 ACJ 2512 (Kar) High Court of Karnataka between K. Yellappa and others Vs. N. Manju and another 2.2023 ACJ 2390 (SC) Supreme Court of India between Jeyarani & another Vs. Manager, Bajaj Allianz General Ins. Co.
Ltd., and another.
3. Judgment copy of MVC No.7984/2019 c/w 7985/2019 4.2023 ACJ 1234 (Kar) High Court of Karnataka between Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. SCCH-14 8 MVC.2743/2020 Amruta and others.
9. Having heard the arguments of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Counsel for the Respondent No.2, upon perusal of the depositions, documents exhibited, citations relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent No.2 and materials available on record, my answer to the above Issues are as under:
Issue No.1 : In the Affirmative
Issue No. 2 : Partly in the Affirmative
Issue No. 3 : As per the Final Order
for the following :
REASONS
10. Issue No. 1 : It is the case of the Petitioner that he had sustained grievous injuries in the Road Traffic accident that occurred on 28102019 at about 4.00 p.m. due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the lorry bearing Regn.No.AP24TB0819.
SCCH-14 9 MVC.2743/2020
11. On the other hand, the Respondent No.2 has denied the accident caused by the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending lorry.
12. In order to prove the case of the Petitioner, he got examined himself as P.W.1 and he also examined one witness as P.W.2 and got marked 18 documents as per Ex.P.1 to Ex.P
18. P.W.1 has reiterated the Petition averments in his chief affidavit. Ex.P1 to Ex.P6 are the True copies of FIR along with Complaint, Spot Panchanama, IMV report, Wound Certificate and Charge sheet. Ex.P.7 is the Referral letter. Ex.P.8 is the Discharge summary. Ex.P.9 is the Medical bills, Ex.P.10 is the Advance receipts. Ex.P.11 is the 3 prescriptions. Ex.P.12 to 14 are Notarized copies of Driving licence, Aadhaar card and PAN card of the petitioner.
13. Upon going through Ex.P.1 FIR and Ex.P2 Complaint shows that on the complaint lodged before Hebbagodi Police Station, the PSI of the concerned Police SCCH-14 10 MVC.2743/2020 Station has registered the case against the driver of the lorry bearing Reg.No.AP24TB0819 for the offences punishable under Sec.279, 337 of IPC. Ex.P.3 is the Spot panchanama drawn in the presence of panchas. Ex.P.4 is the IMV report which shows that the accident was not due to any mechanical defects. Ex.P.5 is the Wound certificate of the Petitioner which shows that the Petitioner had sustained grievous injuries. Ex.P6 is the Certified copy of the Charge sheet which shows that after thorough investigation, the PSI of Hebbagodi Police Station has submitted Chargesheet against the driver of the offending lorry for the offences punishable under Sec.279, 338 of IPC. Ex.P.8 is the Discharge Summary of the Petitioner.
14. Further, P.W.1 examined Dr.Veeresha U. Mathad as P.W.2 and he also reiterated about the injuries sustained by the Petitioner in a RTA.
15. To rebut the evidence of P.W.1, the Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 cross examined the P.W.1 and 2. In the SCCH-14 11 MVC.2743/2020 crossexamination P.W.1 and 2. During their crossexamination PW.1 and 2 have denied the suggestions of the Learned Counsel for Respondent No.2 and nothing could be elicited to disbelieve the contentions of the Petitioner.
16. Further, the Respondent No.2 got examined its Legal Manager by name Thrishi Subbaiah as RW.1 and he reiterated the Objection statement contentions in his chief affidavit. In the cross examination, he admitted the suggestion that the policy was valid on the date of accident and the lorry had valid permit. Further, he admitted that the driver of lorry had valid driving licence. He also admits that on the date of accident, case has been registered against the lorry to which the company has issued the policy. Further RW.1 also admits that the charge sheet has been filed by the I.O. against the driver of the offending lorry in question. He denied the other suggestions of the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner. The record also reveals that admittedly till date the charge sheet has remained SCCH-14 12 MVC.2743/2020 unchallenged. Therefore, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the deposition and documents exhibited, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the accident is occurred by the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending vehicle and in the said accident, the Petitioner had sustained grievous injuries. Accordingly, I answer Issue No. 1 in the 'Affirmative'.
17. Issue No. 2 : As the petitioner has proved that the accident has occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of the offending lorry by its driver, the Petitioner is entitled for compensation.
18. In the petition, the Petitioner has shown his age as 22 years. He has produced Aadhar card to prove his age. As per the Aadhar card i.e. Ex.P.13 the year of birth of the Petitioner is shown as 1997. The accident taken place on 28.10.2019. Hence, the age of the Petitioner, as on the date of SCCH-14 13 MVC.2743/2020 accident was 22 years and the same is to be taken for consideration.
19. Further, the petitioner has averred that he was a student and also working as Paper delivery boy and was earning Rs.20,000/ per month. In this regard, he has not produced any document to substantiate the said fact. Therefore, in the absence of any documentary evidence, this Court is of the opinion that, since the accident has been occurred in the year 2019, as per the directions issued in MFA No.7404/2014 by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, the minimum wages fixed under the Minimum Wages Act has to be considered as a guideline to assess the quantum of compensation. If the nature of avocation of the petitioner is taken into consideration,s he would fall under the category of unskilled labour under the minimum wages Act and her income per month is taken at Rs.13,250/, as the accident in question occurred in the year 2019.
SCCH-14 14 MVC.2743/2020
20. With this background, the quantum of compensation to which the Petitioner is entitled may be adjudicated. For the sake of convenience, discussion may be had under following heads :
I COMPENSATION TOWARDS PAIN, SHOCK AND SUFFERING:
21. The Wound Certificate i.e., Ex.P5 and other medical records reveals that in the accident the Petitioner has sustained following injuries:
Head injury with comminuted depressed fracture of frontal bone.
Further, the Doctor has opined that injury is grievous in nature. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained by the Petitioner, I am of the opinion that, awarding compensation of Rs.30,000/ under this head would be just and reasonable. SCCH-14 15 MVC.2743/2020
I COMPENSATION TOWARDS LOSS OF AMENITIES:
22. Bearing in mind the nature of the injuries sustained by the Petitioner, I am of the opinion that awarding compensation of Rs.25,000/ under this head would be just and reasonable.
III COMPENSATION TOWARDS LOSS OF INCOME DURING THE LAID -UP PERIOD:
23. The Petitioner has averred in the petition as well as in his evidence that he was admitted as an inpatient from 29 102019 to 02112019. Further, P.W.2 Dr.Veeresha U. Mathad has also reiterated the same in his evidence.
24. Upon going through Ex.P.8 i.e., Discharge summary which shows that the Petitioner was admitted as an inpatient from 29102019 to 02112019 at Sparsh Hospital i.e., totally for 5 days. Therefore, the total period which the petitioner was admitted as inpatient is 5 days.
SCCH-14 16 MVC.2743/2020
25. Having regard to the nature of injuries sustained by the Petitioner, I am of the opinion that the laid up period may be considered as one month. Hence, the Petitioner is entitled for compensation of Rs.13,250/ under this head.
IV COMPENSATION TOWARDS ATTENDANT'S CHARGES, EXTRA DIET & NOURISHMENT AND CONVEYANCE :
26. Admittedly, the Petitioner has sustained injuries and during the laid up period, the Petitioner might have engaged an attendant and also he might have spent some amount towards extra diet and nourishment and for his conveyance. In the facts and circumstances of the case, awarding compensation of Rs.3,000/ towards attendants charges, Rs.3,000/ towards extra diet and nourishment and Rs.3,000/ towards conveyance would be just and reasonable. In all, the Petitioner is entitled for compensation of Rs.9,000/ under this head. SCCH-14 17 MVC.2743/2020 V. COMPENSATION TOWARDS MEDICAL EXPENCES :
27. The Petitioner has deposed that he spent more than Rs.2,00,000/ towards medical expenses and other expenses. In order to prove this fact, he has produced 17 medical bills i.e., Ex.P.9 which is totally amounting to Rs.2,77,477/. I have gone through the medical bills and the same are acceptable. Moreover, though there is crossexamination done regarding the medical bills, but same are not seriously disputed by the respondent No.2. Hence, by rounding of the same, the petitioner is entitled for Rs.2,77,500/as a compensation under this head.
VI COMPENSATION TOWARDS LOSS OF FUTURE EARNINGS/COMPENSATION TOWARDS PERMANENT DISABILITY :
28. The Petitioner has alleged that due to the injuries sustained by him in the accident, he has suffered permanent SCCH-14 18 MVC.2743/2020 disablement and cannot work as earlier. Even in his evidence, P.W.1 has deposed to that effect.
29. Further, the Petitioner got examined doctor by name Dr. Veeresha U. Mathad as P.W.2 who also deposed regarding the injuries sustained by the petitioner in a road traffic accident and examination he made. Further, he got marked clinical notes, neurological assessment report, CT brain report and CT scan report at Ex.P.15 and 18. He assessed total permanent neurological disability at 40% .
30. In the crossexamination PW.2 has stated that he has not personally treated the petitioner. He has also admitted that he has seen the petitioner for the first time after three years 2 months from the date of accident. Apart from that, there is also admission to the effect that he has not obtained any opinion from the doctor who treated the petitioner. There is admission regarding the contents of Ex.P.5 in respect of the injury SCCH-14 19 MVC.2743/2020 sustained by the petitioner. In addition to this, he also admits that during the time when petitioner got discharged from Sparsh Hospital his condition was normal and stable. There is also admission to the effect that the disability of the petitioner would fall under the category of mild disability as per the guidelines. He has denied the suggestion that without any disability to the Petitioner, he has given higher rate of disability to the Petitioner.
31. Hence, having regard to the medical records placed on record and the nature of the injuries sustained by the Petitioner and by considering the fact that the petitioner is pursuing his education and also keeping in mind the fact that he was doing paper delivery work, I am of the opinion that considering the disability of the Petitioner with respect to the whole body at 10% would be just and proper.
As per Sarla Verma's Case (2009 ACJ 1298 SC), the SCCH-14 20 MVC.2743/2020 multiplier applicable to the Petitioner is 18. With multiplier of 18, income of Rs.13,250/ per month and disability of the Petitioner with respect to his whole body at 10%, the loss of future income comes to Rs.2,07,360/ (Rs.13,250/ x 12 = 1,59,000/, Rs.1,59,000/x 18 x 10/100 =2,86,200/). Hence, the Petitioner is entitled for compensation of Rs.2,86,200/ under this head.
TOTAL COMPENSATION TO WHICH THE PETITIONER IS ENTITLED:
32. To sum up, the Petitioner is entitled for compensation under the following heads :
1. Pain, shock & Suffering Rs. 30,000/
2. Loss of amenities Rs. 25,000/
3. Attendant's charges, Extra Rs. 9,000/ diet, and conveyance
4. Medical expenses Rs. 2,77,500/
5. Loss of income during the Rs. 13,250/ laid up period
6. Loss of Future income Rs. 2,86,200/ Total Rs. 6,40,950/ SCCH-14 21 MVC.2743/2020 Thus, totally the Petitioner is awarded compensation of Rs.6,40,950/ with costs and simple interest at 6% p.a. from the date of this petition till the date of realization.
33. Regarding Liability: This Court has arrived at the conclusion that the accident has been occurred by the rash and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the offending vehicle bearing No.AP24TB0819.
The Petition shows the Policy is valid and in force at the time of accident. There is no dispute about the validity of the policy. Therefore, both Respondent No.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation to the Petitioner. Accordingly, I answer Issue No.2 "Partly in the Affirmative".
34. ISSUE No. 3 : In view of my findings on Issue No.1 and 2, I proceed to pass the following:
SCCH-14 22 MVC.2743/2020
ORDER The Claim Petition filed by the Petitioner against the Respondent No. 1 and 2 U/Sec. 166 of M.V. Act is hereby allowed in part with costs.
The Petitioner is entitled for
Compensation of Rs.6,40,950/ along with
interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the Petition till the date of deposit of Award amount.
The Respondents are jointly and severally liable to pay the compensation amount to the Petitioner.
The Respondent No.2 being the insurer of the offending vehicle, is directed to deposit the Award amount and interest within 60 days from the date of the Award.
After being deposit of the Award amount and interest by the Respondent No.2, 60% of the award amount is ordered to be paid to the Petitioner by way of E payment and after SCCH-14 23 MVC.2743/2020 proper identification and the remaining 40% of the award amount shall be kept in Fixed deposit in his name in any Nationalized or Scheduled Bank for a period of 3 years of his choice.
The Advocate fee is fixed at Rs.1,000/. Draw Award accordingly.
(Dictated to the stenographer, typed and computerized by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open Court on this 10th day of January 2024) (YATHISHA.R) MEMBER, MACT, XVI ADDL. JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU.
Annexure Witnesses examined on behalf of the Petitioners :
P.W.1 : Harinarayan Udaynarayan Tiwari @ Harish Tiwari P.W.2 : Dr. Veeresha U. Mathad Documents marked as Exhibits for the Petitioners :
Ex.P.1 : Certified Copy of FIR
Ex.P.2 : Certified Copy of complaint
Ex.P.3 : Certified Copy of Spot Panchanama
SCCH-14 24 MVC.2743/2020
Ex.P.4 : Certified Copy of IMV report
Ex.P.5 : Certified Copy of Wound certificate
Ex.P.6 : Certified Copy of Charge sheet
Ex.P.7 : Referral Letter
Ex.P.8 : Discharge summary
Ex.P.9 : 17 Medical Bills
Ex.P.10 : 5 advance receipts
Ex.P.11 : 3 Medical Prescriptions
Ex.P.12 : Notarized Copy of Driving licence
Ex.P.13 : Notarized Copy of Aadhar card
Ex.P.14 : Notarized Copy of PAN card
Ex.P.15 : Clinical notes
Ex.P.16 : Neurological Assessment Report
Ex.P.17 : CT brain report
Ex.P.18 : CT scan report
Witness examined on behalf of the Respondents : RW.1 : Thrishi Subbaiah Documents marked as Exhibits for the Respondents : Ex.R.1 - Authorization Letter Ex.R.2 - True Copy of Policy (YATHISHA.R) MEMBER, MACT, XVI ADDL. JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU.