Partly allowed

Sri. N. Jagadeesh v. the Manager

Karnataka HC17 Oct 2022MFA/190/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This修正 appeal against the MACT's judgment dismissing a claim for enhanced compensation. The Court partly allowed the appeal, increasing the compensation from Rs. 2,57,760/- to Rs. 3,39,680/- with interest, directing the insurer to pay within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced to Rs. 3,39,680/- with interest. The Insurance Company is directed to pay the amount within six weeks.

Sri. N. Jagadeesh Vs the Manager — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 17^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P. SANDESH

¶6

M.F.A.NO.190/2016 (MV-I)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI N. JAGADEESH S/O. LATE NARAYANA RAO, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, R/AT NO. 9/2, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, 12^TH CROSS, LAKSHMIDEVINAGARA, NANDINI LAYOUT, BENGALURU-96. … APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI MAHADEVA SWAMY P., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

THE MANAGER UNIVERSAL SAMPO GEN. INS. CO. LTD., NO.7/3, 2^ND FLOOR ABOVE BARCLAYS FINANCE OPP: 100 FEET ROAD OLD MADRAS ROAD INDIRANAGARA, BENGALURU-50.

¶12

SRI CHANDRASHEKAR BHAT S/O. N.V. BHAT, R/AT GANESH RAO LAYOUT, SUBHASHNAGARA, NELAMANGALA TOWN-23. ... RESPONDENTS

¶13

(BY SRI S.V.HEGDE MULKHAND, ADVOCATE FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 21.11.2017)

¶14

¶15

THIS M.F.A IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 04/05/2015 PASSED IN MVC NO.5447/2013 ON THE FILE OF II ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND XXVIII ACMM, MACT, BENGALURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶16

THIS M.F.A. COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

J U D G M E N T

¶18

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1.

¶19

This appeal is filed challenging the judgment and award dated 04.05.2015 passed in M.V.C.No.5447/2013 on the file of the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru (SCCH-13) (‘the Tribunal’ for short).

¶20

The parties are referred to as per their original rankings before the Tribunal to avoid confusion and for the convenience of the Court.

¶21

The factual matrix of the case of the claimant before the Tribunal is that he met with an accident and as a result, he had sustained communited fracture of both bones of right leg

¶22

¶23

lower 1/3^rd and was inpatient for a period of 7 days and subjected to surgery. The Tribunal, taking note of the material available on record, awarded compensation of Rs.2,57,760/with interest at 6% per annum.

¶24

The Tribunal awarded an amount of Rs.50,000/-

¶25

towards pain and suffering and it was the accident of the year 2013. Hence, it does not require any interference.

¶26

The Tribunal awarded Rs.3,000/- towards medical

¶27

expenses, based on the medical bills. Hence, the same is just and reasonable and does not require any interference.

¶28

The Tribunal awarded Rs.7,000/towards conveyance, nourishment, food and attending charges.

¶29

Considering the fact that the claimant was inpatient for a period of 7 days, the same is just and reasonable.

¶30

The Tribunal has awarded an amount of Rs.18,000/-

¶31

towards loss of earning during laid up period taking the income at Rs.6,000/- per month. Since, the claimant has suffered communited fracture of tibia and fibula, it requires minimum 5

¶32

¶33

months for uniting fracture and rest. Hence, it is appropriate to award Rs.40,000/- as against Rs.18,000/- by taking the income as Rs.8,000/-.

¶34

The Tribunal awarded Rs.20,000/- on the head of loss of amenities and assessed the disability at 13%. When such being the case, having considered his age, it is appropriate to award Rs.30,000/- as against Rs.20,000/-.

¶35

The Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,49,760/- towards loss of future earnings taking the income at Rs.6,000/- per month. It is the accident of the year 2013 and the notional income would be Rs.8,000/-per month. Hence, taking the income at Rs.8,000/- per month, multiplier ‘16’ and the disability at 13%, the loss of future earnings would be Rs.1,99,680/(8,000 x 12 x 16 x 18/100).

¶36

The Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/- towards future medical expenses and the Doctor has deposed that Rs.12,000/- would be required. Hence, it does not require any interference. Therefore, in all, the claimant is entitled for

¶37

¶38

compensation of Rs.3,39,680/- with interest at 6% per annum as against Rs2,57,760/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶39

In view of the discussions made above, I pass the

¶40

following:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

(i) The appeal is allowed in part.

¶43

(ii) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal dated 04.05.2015 passed in M.V.C.No.5447/2013 is modified granting compensation of Rs.3,39,680/- as against Rs.2,57,760/- awarded by the Tribunal with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till deposit.

¶44

(iii) The Insurance Company is directed to pay the compensation amount with interest within six weeks from today.

¶45

(iv) The Registry is directed to transmit the records to the concerned Tribunal, forthwith.

¶46

(v) In all other respects, the order of the Tribunal remains undisturbed.

¶47

Sd/JUDGE

¶48

Sri. N. Jagadeesh v. the Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. N. Jagadeesh 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

Mr. Dharnappa Shetty Vs Mr. Thimmappa Poojary

Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Limited Vs Smt Nagalakshmi

M/S Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd, Vs Kiran @ Kirankumar

Srinivasa R Vs Sathisha

Smt Muniyamma Vs M/S. Bharathi Axa General Insurance Co. Ltd.

B.S.Krushi Vs Badhruddin