Partly allowed

M Chethan v. the Manager

Karnataka HC19 Oct 2022MFA/1700/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, in the first appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, modified the Claims Tribunal's judgment. It enhanced the compensation from Rs.1,39,000 to Rs.1,79,000 considering the injuries sustained and medical expenses incurred by the appellant in a road traffic accident.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs.1,79,000; insurance company directed to pay deposit with 6% p.a. interest within six weeks.

M Chethan Vs the Manager — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶6

MFA No.1700 OF 2020(MV)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

M CHETHAN S/O H G MARUTHI AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS R/O NO.66, 20TH MAIN ROAD KEMPEGOWDA LAYOUT LAGGERE, BANGALORE-560010.

¶9

...APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI.K.V.NAIK, ADV. FOR SRI.CHANNAPPA K N., ADV.)

¶11

AND:

¶12

1 . THE MANAGER M/S ZOOM CARS INDIA PVT LTD NO.308,1 TO 3 FLOOR 100 FEET ROAD MAIN ROAD INDIRANAGAR 1ST STAGE BENGALURU-560038.

¶13

2 . THE MANAGER ICICI LOMBARD GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE NO.89 SVR COMPLEX HOSUR MAIN ROAD MADIWALA BANGALORE-560068.

¶14

¶15

DEEKSHITH K R ROA

¶16

S/O RATNAKAR K V MAJOR R/AT NO.185, 1^ST MAIN ROAD 2^ND CROSS, INDL. AREA, WOC ROAD. RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU-560010.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI.B.PRADEEP, ADV. FOR R2: NOTICE TO R1 & R3 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED. 20.03.2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.4603/2015, ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT, XVIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU (SCCH-4), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶20

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

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

This appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) has been filed by the claimant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 20.03.2019 passed by the MACT, Bengaluru in MVC No.4603/2015.

¶23

¶24

2. Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal

¶25

briefly stated are that on 29.05.2015 at about 03.00 p.m., the claimant was proceeding in a Car bearing Registration No.KA-03-AB-2460 along with others and was driven by name Deekshitha on Nice Road, in a rash and negligent manner, endangering human life, without observing traffic rules and regulations, when it reached near Puruvankara Apartment, Thalagattapura, due to her negligent driving lost control and drove the Car on the stone, which was lying on the said road. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized.

¶26

The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation. It was pleaded that he spent huge amount towards medical expenses, conveyance, etc. It was further pleaded that the accident occurred purely on account of the

¶27

¶28

rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

¶29

On service of notice, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 have appeared through counsel and filed written statement in which the averments made in the petition were denied. It was pleaded that the petition itself is false and frivolous in the eye of law. The age, avocation and income of the claimant and the medical expenses are denied. It was further pleaded that the quantum of compensation claimed by the claimant is exorbitant. Hence, they sought for dismissal of the petition.

¶30

The respondent No.3 did not appear before the Tribunal inspite of service of notice and was placed ex-parte.

¶31

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter

¶32

¶33

recorded the evidence. The claimant himself was examined as PW-1 and Dr.S.Ramchandra was examined as PW-2 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P15. On behalf of the respondents, one witness was examined as RW-1 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.R1 to Ex.R6. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver, as a result of which, the claimant sustained injuries. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.1,39,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed.

¶34

The learned counsel for the claimant has contended that due to the accident, the claimant has

¶35

¶36

suffered grievous injuries. He was inpatient in the hospital for a period of 2 days. He has spent more than Rs.54,000/- for medical expenses. He has suffered lot of pain during the treatment. The compensation of Rs.1,39,000/granted by the Tribunal is on lower side. Hence, he sought for enhancement of compensation.

¶37

On the other hand, the learned counsel for

¶38

the Insurance Company has contended that the injuries suffered by the claimant are minor in nature. He was inpatient in the hospital only for a period of 2 days. Therefore, considering the evidence of the claimant and injuries suffered by him, the Tribunal has granted just and reasonable compensation. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.

¶39

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.

¶40

¶41

9. It is not in dispute that the claimant has

¶42

sustained injuries in the road traffic accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

¶43

Due to the accident, he has sustained grievous injuries. He was inpatient in the hospital for a period of 2 days. He has spent more than Rs.54,000/- for medical expenses. He has suffered lot of pain during the treatment. Therefore, considering the evidence of claimant, considering the medical bills and the injuries suffered by the claimant, I am of the opinion that in addition to the compensation awarded by the Tribunal, another Rs.40,000/- can be awarded with interest.

¶44

In the result, the appeal is allowed in part . The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.

¶45

¶46

The claimants are entitled to a total compensation of Rs.1,79,000/- as against Rs.1,39,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶47

The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.

¶48

Sd/JUDGE

¶49

HA/-

M Chethan v. the Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M Chethan v. the Manager

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. Danamma Vs the Manager

N T Ranganatha Vs Gopalakrishna

Pradeep. B. v. Vs Ashwathappa

Sri Krupashankar Vs Sri Yogesh H R

The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Rajanna S/O Siddappa

J a I Victor Vs Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd.