Partly allowed

Smt M Bharathi v. D B Dinesh

Karnataka HC29 Jan 2014MFA/341/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judge enhanced compensation awarded in two motor vehicle accident claims arising from a bus-lorry collision. The court allowed the appeals partly, directing the insurer to deposit the specific additional amounts to the claimants with interest.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation awarded: Rs.95,000/- to the male claimant and Rs.30,000/- to the female claimant, with 6% interest.

Smt M Bharathi Vs D B Dinesh — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE

¶3

Dated this the 29^th day of January, 2014

¶4

Before

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HULUVADI G RAMESH

¶6

Miscellaneous First Appeals 341 a/w 342 / 2011 (MV)

¶7

Between

¶8

In MVC 341/2011

¶9

Smt M Bharathi, 38 yrs W/o Maralu Siddaiah

¶10

In MVC 342/2011

¶11

Sri maralu Siddiah, 45 yrs S/o Venkataramaiah

¶12

Both are r/a Kuppur Village & Post Chikkanayakanahalli Taluk Tumkur District

¶13

Appellants

¶14

(By Sri M K Bhaskaraiah, Adv.)

¶15

And

¶16

1 D B Dinesh, 40 yrs S/o D N Byregowda Chandan RCC Castings (Byrapura Gate) R/a Chowlgere Village Alur Post & Taluk Hassan

¶17

2 New India Assurance Co Ltd Hema Mansion, II Floor Gandhi Bazar, Hassan By its Br. Manager

¶18

3 Manager Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Kundapur Depot, Kundapur common Mangalore District Respondents

¶19

(By Sri P B Raju / A M Venkatesh, Adv. For R2; Sri K S Bharath Kumar, Adv. For R3_

¶20

First Appeals are filed under S.173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act praying to modify the award dated 11.11.2010 in MVC 847/2001 and 848/2001 by the Addl. MACT, Chikkanayakanahalli.

¶21

First Appeals coming on for Admission this day, the Court delivered the following:

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

These two appeals arise out of the common award passed by the

¶24

Senior Civil Judge / Addl. MACT, Chikkanayakanahalli in MVC 847 and 849 / 2001 on 11.11.2010. Both the cases pertain to the injuries suffered by the respective claimants.

¶25

On 4.7.2001, claimant Marulu Siddaiah along with his wife and

¶26

daughter was travelling in a KSRTC Bus bearing No. KA 19 F 1432 from

¶27

¶28

Bangalore towards Sakleshpur. Around 12.30 pm in the afternoon near Halethimmanahalli on Hassan - Mangalore road, a Tipper lorry bearing No. KA 02 A 931 came in a negligent manner and dashed against the KSRTC bus. Due to the impact, claimant in MVC 847/2001 and claimant in MVC 849/2001 suffered grievous injuries. In the claim petitions filed, on the matter being contested by the insurer and also the KSRTC, raising relevant issues the Tribunal having held that the accident was due to the negligence

¶29

of the driver of Tipper Lorry, awarded compensation of Rs.1,83,000/- and

¶30

Rs.2,00,000/- respectively, on the following heads:

¶31

In MVC 847/2001

¶32

Pain & suffering Rs.30,000/Loss of future earnings Rs.1,22,400/Medical expenses Rs.20,000/Food, conveyance, etc Rs.10,000/-

¶33

In MVC 849/2001

¶34

Pain & suffering Rs.35,000/Medical expenses Rs.1,45,000/Food, conveyance, etc Rs.20,000/-

¶35

¶36

The claimant in MVC 847/2001 who is working as a Wireless Operator at Secunderabad, as per medical evidence, has suffered fracture of the upper 1/3^rd of the Tibia, blunt injury to the abdomen and dislocation of the right hip joint. He has undergone treatment as inpatient for nearly 106 days. The disability is assessed at 30% to the whole body, as per the finding of the Medical Board.

¶37

Taking the disability on a little higher side, claimant would be awarded Rs.40,000/- towards loss of future earning; Rs.20,000/- towards loss of amenities and enjoyment in life; Rs.20,000/- towards diet, conveyance and medical expenses and Rs.15,000/- towards incidental charges. Thus, the claimant would be entitled for Rs.95,000/- over and above what has been awarded by the Tribunal with 6% interest from the date of petition till deposit.

¶38

Claimant in MVC 849/2001 is said to have suffered fracture of the left forehand and there is said to be insertion of steel plate. The compensation awarded towards pain and suffering is sufficient, so also

¶39

towards medical expenses. However, claimant would be entitled to Rs.10,000/- towards incidental expenses and Rs.20,000/- towards loss of amenities and enjoyment in life. She has not stated anything as to inconvenience caused due to disability to the left hand, therefore, she is not entitled for any such compensation on the head loss of future earning due to disability. Thus, claimant is entitled for Rs.30,000/- over and above what has been awarded by the Tribunal with 6% interest from the date of petition till deposit.

¶40

Insurer to deposit the amount in both the cases, in three months. Appeals are allowed in part.

¶41

Sd/Judge

¶42

Smt M Bharathi v. D B Dinesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt M Bharathi v. D B Dinesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Amuda Vs Sri M Devaraju

Sri N Lokesh Vs Sri Prakash

Sri B Chandramonhan Gupta Vs the New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Sri Maralu Siddiah Vs D B Dinesh

Vayyapuri Vs the Divisional Manager

Smt. Kamalamma Vs Smt. Jyothi