Partly allowed

Manjunath @ Manjugouda S/O Yamunappa Gouda v. B.S. Biradar S/O Shanta Gouda Biradar and Anr.

Karnataka HC15 Oct 2014MFA/200293/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court Bench allowed a miscellaneous first appeal against an MVC Tribunal award. The Court enhanced compensation by recalculating future loss of earnings, transportation, amenities, and loss of income during treatment, granting an additional Rs. 53,560 with interest.

What did the court decide?

Additional compensation of Rs. 53,560 with interest at 9% p.a. granted.

Manjunath @ Manjugouda S/O Yamunappa Gouda Vs B.S… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2014)

¶1

MFA 200293/14

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA GULBARGA BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 15^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2014

¶5

BEFORE:

¶6

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S.PACHHAPURE

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL No.200293 OF 2014 [MV]

¶8

BETWEEN

¶9

MANJUNATH @ MANJUGOUDA S/O YAMUNAPPA GOUDA AGE : 23 YEARS, OCC:MILK VENDING & AGRI., R/O MALLA,TQ.SURPUR, DIST.YADGIR, NOW AT BASAVESHWARA COLONY, RAICHUR-584101

¶10

... APPELLANT (BY SRI.BASAVARAJ R.MATH, ADV.)

¶11

AND

¶12

B.S. BIRADAR S/O SHANTA GOUDA BIRADAR AGE:MAJOR, OCC:OWNER OF SWIFT CAR BEARING NO.KA-35/M-6739, R/O INDIAN FARMERS FERTILIZERS CO-OP.LTD., AREA OFFICE,V/44/III FLOOR, STATION ROAD, NEAR PRIYADARSHINI HOTEL, HOSPET-583201

¶13

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., I FLOOR,OPP.KADAM FACTORY, LINGASUGUR ROAD,NEAR GANDHI CHOWK

¶14

MFA 200293/14

¶15

¶16

RAICHUR-584101 REP.BY ITS MANAGER

¶17

... RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI.MANVENDRA REDDY ADV. FOR R2 (VK NOT FILED) NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED.)

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT AND AWARD DT: 20.03.2012 PASSED IN MVC NO: 209/2012 ON THE FILE OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL (FTC-I), AT RAICHUR, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶20

THIS MFA COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Though the matter is listed for admission, with the consent of both side, taken for final disposal.

¶23

The appellant dissatisfied with the amount

¶24

of compensation granted by the Tribunal for the injuries sustained in the motor vehicle accident, has filed this appeal, seeking enhancement.

¶25

The facts reveal that on 30.07.2011, the

¶26

appellant was travelling in the car bearing reg.

¶27

MFA 200293/14

¶28

¶29

No.KA-35/M-6739 and due to the rash and negligent driving of the car by its driver an accident occurred. As a result, the appellant sustained injuries and was treated in the hospital. He suffered disablement. Hence, he made a claim for compensation for pain, suffering, mental agony, medical expenses, etc.

¶30

His claim petition in MVC No.209/12 was clubbed with MVC No.210/12. After recording the evidence, the Tribunal has granted a sum of Rs.2,16,000-00 with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of the petition till its payment. Dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded, the present appeal is filed.

¶31

I have heard learned counsel for the

¶32

parties.

¶33

The point that arises for my consideration

is;

MFA 200293/14

Whether the appellant is entitled to the enhancement of compensation? If so, to what extent?

¶38

Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the assessment of income, disability and the compensation on each of the heads is on the lower side and seeks enhancement.

¶39

On the other hand, learned counsel for the insurer submits that the Tribunal on the basis of the material placed on record awarded a just compensation and no grounds are made out to call for the impugned Judgment and Award.

¶40

It is not in dispute that the appellant has suffered the fracture of right femur and multiple ribs. He was treated in the hospital at Raichur and Sparsh Hospital at Bangalore. On the basis of the injuries suffered, a sum of Rs.35,000-00 has been granted as compensation towards pain and sufferings and it appears to be just and reasonable.

¶41

MFA 200293/14

¶42

¶43

So far as the assessment of income is concerned, the Tribunal has assessed at Rs.4,500-00 p.m. The accident is of the year 2011. Generally, a sum of Rs.5,500-00 is considered as income even in respect of a labour in the Lok Adalats with the consent of the parties and therefore, the assessment of income at Rs.4,500-00 p.m. is on the lower side and requires to be assessed at Rs.5,500-00 p.m.

¶44

The appellant was aged 21 years at the time

¶45

of the accident and the multiplier 18 is applicable. So far as the assessment of disability is concerned, the doctor stated at 15%. The Tribunal accepted it at 5%. The doctor, who treated the appellant is not examined to prove the disability. Anyhow, the Tribunal has assigned its own reasons to assess the disability at 5%. Even taking the general principle to assess the disability at particular limb on the basis of the assessment of the disability at 20%, it would be just and proper to consider at 7%.

¶46

MFA 200293/14

¶47

¶48

With the income of Rs.5,500-00 p.m., the disability at 7% and applying the multiplier 18, the compensation towards loss of future earning would be;

¶49

Rs.5,500 x 12 x 18 x 7 = Rs.83,160-00 100

¶50

Deducting a sum of Rs.48,600-00, the additional compensation payable towards loss of earning would be Rs.34,560-00.

¶51

The Tribunal has not awarded any

¶52

compensation towards transportation charges. The appellant has taken treatment in the hospital at Bangalore and Raichur and has to incur expenses for his journey and therefore, I think it is just and proper to grant a sum of Rs.10,000-00 towards transportation, conveyance, etc.

¶53

A sum of Rs.5,000-00 is granted towards loss of amenities. With a disability suffered, I

¶54

MFA 200293/14

¶55

¶56

think it is just and proper to grant an additional sum of Rs.5,000-00 on this head.

¶57

Towards loss of income during the period of treatment, only a sum of Rs.18,000-00 is granted. At the rate of Rs.5,500-00 p.m., it would be Rs.22,000-00 and deducting the sum of Rs.18,000-00, the appellant would be entitled to an additional sum of Rs.4,000-00 towards loss of income during the period of treatment. The compensation granted towards medical expenses is just and proper.

¶58

Thereby, the appellant is entitled to the following additional sum:

¶59

Rs. Ps.

¶60

Loss of future earning. : 34,560-00 Transportation charges. : 10,000-00 Loss of amenities. : 5,000-00 Loss of income during the 4,000-00 period of treatment. Total : 53,560-00

¶61

MFA 200293/14

¶62

¶63

The appellant is entitled to the additional sum of Rs.53,560-00 with interest at 9% p.a. Hence the point is answered in affirmative.

¶64

Consequently the appeal is allowed in part. The appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.53,560-00 with interest at 9% p.a from the date of the petition till its payment in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal. The amount enhanced shall be paid to the appellant.

¶65

Sd/-

¶66

JUDGE.

¶67

Ksm*

Manjunath @ Manjugouda S/O Yamunappa Gouda v. B.S. Biradar S/O Shanta Gouda Biradar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjunath @ Manjugouda S/O Yamunappa Gouda v. B.S. Biradar S/O Shanta Gouda Biradar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

United India Insurance Co.Ltd. Vs Amaragundappa S/O Late Basappa and Ors.

Malingaraya S/O Shivanna Balabatti Vs Mohd. Imran Ahmed S/Omohd. Yousuf and Anr.

The Manager, Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co.,Ltd Vs Hanamanth S/O Jaganappa Lamani @ Rathod

Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Vs Smt.Laxmi @ Anjana Devi

Icici Lombard Gen. Ins, Co.,Ltd, Vs Peerappa S/O Dhulappa Dharigond and Otrs

Pushpa W/O Virupakshappa Sajjan Vs T. Ramesh S/O Tangavelu and Anr.