Karnataka High Court
Sri Hanumanthaiah vs M/S The Oriental Insurance on 29 March, 2016
Bench: N.K.Patil, Rathnakala
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2016
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE N.K. PATIL
AND
THE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RATHNAKALA
MISC. FIRST APPEAL NO.3808/2014 (MV)
BETWEEN:
SRI HANUMANTHAIAH
S/O SANJEEVAIAH
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
AGALAGUNTE VILLAGE
TUMKUR TALUK
TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 200
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT
C/O RAMESH
MUNIREDDY BLOCK,
3RD BLOCK, GANGANAGAR,
BANGALORE - 560 006. ...APPELLANT
(BY SRI H.B.SOMAPUR, ADV.)
AND:
1. M/S. THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE
CO. LTD.,
BY ITS REGIONAL MANAGER
REGIONAL OFFICE, NO.44/45,
RESIDENCY ROAD CROSS,
P.B.NO.25123, LEO SHOPPING COMPLEX,
BANGALORE - 25.
2. SRI NAGARAJU, MAJOR,
S/O RANGADHAMAIAH
2
RANGANAYAKANAPALYA,
BALLAPURA POST,
BELLAVI HOBLI,
TUMKUR DISTRICT - 572 200. ...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI E.S.INDIRESH, ADV. FOR R1;
R2 - SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)
THIS M.F.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 22.01.2014
PASSED IN MVC NO.1511/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE 14TH
ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU
CITY (SCCH.10), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR
COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF
COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR
JUDGMENT ON 16/03/2016 AND COMING ON FOR
PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT THIS DAY, RATHNAKALA J.,
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:-
JUDGMENT
The appellant is aggrieved by the inadequate compensation awarded by 14th Addl. Judge, Court of Small Causes, MACT, Bengaluru City (SCCH-10) (for short, 'Tribunal') in respect of the injuries sustained by him in the road traffic accident
2. Succinctly stated, the appellant filed a claim petition under Section 166(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, before the Tribunal, contending that on 24.02.2011, 3 at about 9.00 a.m., while he was proceeding in an Auto- rickshaw bearing Registration No.KA-06-A-4361 from Bhimsandra towards Tumkur, as a passenger, on NH-206 road, near H.B. Petrol Bunk, Kuntammana Thota, the vehicle was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner with high speed thereby, control over the vehicle was lost, the auto-rickshaw capsized and he sustained injury to urethra, fracture of pelvic and multiple injuries all over the body. After getting first aid treatment at Government Hospital, he was shifted to Victoria Hospital, and was treated as inpatient for four days.
3. The claim was contested by the insurer/respondent of the vehicle. The Tribunal on overall consideration of oral and documentary evidence placed by the both parties, allowed the claim petition in part awarding a compensation of Rs.4,32,000/- with 4 interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization.
4. Sri. H.B. Somapur, learned counsel for the appellant, submits that the appellant had suffered pelvic fracture and urethral injury, which caused permanent disability. The fracture is mal-united. He cannot squat on the floor, climb the stairs, kneel down, use Indian toilet and he is still on treatment. As per the evidence of PW2/Doctor, there is permanent disability of 20% to the whole body. He was working as a mason. Due to permanent disability he is unable to carry on his profession as before. He has suffered urethral stricture (Rupture Membranous Urethra), fracture of both superior and inferior pubic rami; SPC, operation was done on suprapubic cystostomy. He is suffering from Flabby corpora (Shunken Penis), Scrotal tenderness (Testis swollen), Suprapubic pain. These injuries work out to 22% disability to whole body. He is unable to 5 pass urine via naturalis. But, the Tribunal unmindful of his sufferings, has awarded compensation of Rs.4,32,000/- which does not commensurate to the pain, suffering, medical expenses met, future loss of income and future medical expenses. Therefore, the judgment of Tribunal may be modified by enhancing compensation by just and reasonable amount.
5. Sri. E.S. Indiresh, learned counsel for the Respondent No.1/Insurer submits that in the absence of any documentary proof about his income, the loss of earning during treatment period and loss of future earning had to be worked out by the Tribunal by assuming his income Rs.60,000/- per annum. Towards medical expenses and incidental charges Rs.60,000/- is awarded in accordance with medical bills produced by him. Rs.1,00,000/- awarded towards pain and suffering, 10,000/- towards loss of amenities and discomfort is reasonable. Therefore, the impugned 6 judgment and award of the Tribunal is just and reasonable and not warranting for interference.
6. In the light of the above rival submissions and also on perusal of the impugned judgment and award with the case records, the only point that arises for our consideration is:
Whether the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable?
7. The occurrence of the accident on 24.02.2011 involving the autorickshaw bearing Registration No.KA-06-A-4361 is not disputed, so also the injuries suffered by the claimant. The appellant was aged about 45 years, at the relevant point of time and was working as a mason. Having regard to his age, date of accident and his profession, his monthly income may be safely re-assessed at Rs.6,000/- per month. As per the medical evidence, he had suffered permanent disability of 20% + 22% to the whole body. He had 7 undergone surgery and was inpatient for four days. Still he is said to be suffering with pain in the pelvic region, unable to pass urine via naturalis, no penetration and sensation unable to have orgasm, and has to carry urine bag which has to be replaced once in every 15 days. In the back drop of above facts, we award Rs.1,50,000/- towards pain and suffering as against Rs.1,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. In respect of medial expenses and incidental charges, Rs.75,000/- would be the reasonable amount as against Rs.60,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. In respect of loss of earning during treatment period, having regarding to the nature of injuries, he must have been unable to move around at least for six months. Hence, Rs.36,000/- (6,000 x 6) will meet the situation as against Rs.10,000/-awarded by the Tribunal. Towards loss of amenities, Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal is on lower side and Rs.1,00,000/- would serve the ends of justice be met.
8
For the purpose of capitalizing his loss of future income arising out of permanent disability, the suitable multiplier applicable to his age of 45 is '14' (as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Sarla Verma and Others -vs- Delhi Transport Corporation and Another reported in 2009 ACJ 1298). The loss of future income proportionate to the disability of 42% works out to Rs.4,23,360/- (Rs.6,000/- x 42 x 12 x 14/100 = Rs.4,23,360/-). No amount is awarded by the Tribunal towards future medical expenses and loss of marital bliss, hence, under the said head, he is entitled for a sum of Rs.1,00,000/-.
8. Thus, the appellant is entitled for the compensation as per the following break ups
1.Pain & suffering Rs.1,50,000/-
2.Medical Expenses Rs. 75,000/-
and incidental
charges
3. Loss of amenities Rs.1,00,000/-
4. Loss of income Rs. 36,000/-
during laid-up period
9
for six months
5. Loss of future Rs.4,23,360/-
income
6. Future medical Rs.1,00,000/-
expenses and marital
bliss
TOTAL Rs.8,84,360/-
9. Accordingly, the appellant is entitled for a total compensation of Rs.8,84,360/- as against Rs.4,32,000/- awarded by the Tribunal. Accordingly, there would be enhanced compensation of Rs.4,52,360/-.
Since the accident is of the year 2011, as per the rate of interest in vogue vide judicial pronouncements of this Court and Apex Court, we deem it proper to award 9% interest per annum from the date of petition till realization on the enhanced compensation.
10. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal filed by the appellant is allowed in part.
10
The judgment and award dated 22.01.2014 in MVC No.1511/2011 on the file of the 14th Additional Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bengaluru City (SCCH-10), is hereby modified, awarding additional compensation of Rs.4,52,360/- with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of petition till realization.
The respondent No.1-insurer is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation of Rs.4,52,360/- with interest at 9% p.a. from the date of petition with accrued interest, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Out of the enhanced compensation amount of Rs.4,52,360/-, Rs.3,00,000/- with accrued interest shall be invested in the name of appellant/claimant in any Nationalized bank/Scheduled Bank/Grameena Bank of claimant's choice for a period of 5 years renewable by another 5 years, with liberty to him to draw the interest accrued on it, periodically. 11
Rest of the amount shall be disbursed in his favor. The case records shall be transmitted to the concerned Tribunal forthwith.
Draw the award, accordingly.
Sd/-
JUDGE Sd/-
JUDGE JTR/-