Partly allowed

Sri Nagaraju v. S Sundarraj

Karnataka HC6 Dec 2022MFA/2736/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this first appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the High Court of Karnataka allowed the appeal in part. The court enhanced the compensation awarded by the Claims Tribunal from Rs.189,061/- to Rs.239,061/- due to the claimant's treatment for fractures, directing the insurance company to deposit the additional amount with interest.

What did the court decide?

Total compensation enhanced to Rs.239,061/-; Insurance company directed to deposit amount with 6% p.a. interest within six weeks.

Sri Nagaraju Vs S Sundarraj — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

MFA No. 2736 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.2736 OF 2022(MV-I)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRI NAGARAJU S/O NANJAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS R/AT NO.126, KANASU SUKHADAYI FLORA SARDAR VALLABAYI PATEL NAGARA POLICE EXTENTION, MYSURU – 570028.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. VEERABHADRA SWAMY H P., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

S SUNDARRAJ S/O SUBRAMANI, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS R/AT D.NO.371, KARISOLE ROAD MITIONARY HILLS, UDAGAMANDALAM Digitally signed SWOAN HOUSE HILL, NILIGIRI, OOTY by DHANALAKSHMI THAMILU NADU STATE – 643001. MURTHY 2. THE MANAGER Location: High Court of UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., Karnataka NO.1134, PRINCE OF WALLS ROAD

¶13

THE MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., NO.1134, PRINCE OF WALLS ROAD NEAR BALLAL CIRCLE, CHAMRAJAPURAM MYSURU - 570005.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

¶16

MFA No. 2736 of 2022

¶17

(BY SMT. MANJULA N TEJASWI., ADVOCATE FOR R2: NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED: 06.12.2022)

¶18

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 30.11.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.1454/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND MACT, MYSURU, ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶19

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

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

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 30.11.2021 passed by MACT, Mysuru in MVC No.1454/2019.

¶22

Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 31.7.2019 when the claimant was proceeding from Devegowda Circle on Ring Road, near VTU junction, Sathagalli Mysuru, at that time, car bearing registration No.TN-43-J-5637 being driven by its driver at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, dashed

¶23

¶24

MFA No. 2736 of 2022

¶25

to the vehicle of the claimant. 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 charges, etc. It was further pleaded that the accident occurred purely on account of the rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

¶27

On service of notice, the respondents appeared through counsel and filed written statement in which the averments made in the petition were denied.

¶28

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded the evidence. The claimant himself was examined as PW-1 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P10. On behalf of the respondents, neither any witness was examined nor any document was produced. The Claims

¶29

¶30

MFA No. 2736 of 2022

¶31

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.189,061/- 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.

¶32

The learned counsel for the claimant has contended that as per wound certificate, the claimant has sustained fracture of proximal humerus, on right elbow and fracture of wrist right hand. He was treated as inpatient for a period of 4 days. He has produced medical bills at Ex.P-8 amounting to Rs.65,620/-. Even after discharge from the hospital, he was not in a position to discharge his regular work. He has suffered lot of pain during treatment. But the Tribunal has not granted any

¶33

¶34

MFA No. 2736 of 2022

¶35

compensation for 'loss of amenities'. Further, the overall compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Hence, he sought for allowing the appeal.

¶36

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company has contended that the claimant has sustained simple injuries and he has not examined the doctor regarding disability and injuries suffered by him. Considering the evidence of the claimant and injuries mentioned in the wound certificate and considering the medical bills, the Tribunal has granted just and reasonable compensation and it does not call for interference. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.

¶37

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and

¶38

perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.

¶39

It is not in dispute that the claimant has

¶40

sustained injuries in the road traffic accident occurred on

¶41

¶42

MFA No. 2736 of 2022

¶43

31.7.2019 due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

¶44

As per wound certificate, the claimant has sustained fracture of proximal humerus, on right elbow and fracture of wrist right hand. He was treated as inpatient for a period of 4 days. He has produced medical bills at Ex.P-8 amounting to Rs.65,620/-. He has not examined the doctor regarding disability suffered by him. Considering the evidence of the claimant and injuries mentioned in the wound certificate and considering the medical bills, I am inclined to award compensation of Rs.50,000/- in addition to compensation of Rs.189,061/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶45

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

¶46

The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.239,061/- as against Rs.189,061/- awarded by the Tribunal .

¶47

¶48

MFA No. 2736 of 2022

¶49

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

¶50

receipt of copy of this judgment .

¶51

Sd/JUDGE

¶52

¶53

List No.: 2 Sl No.: 24

Sri Nagaraju v. S Sundarraj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Nagaraju v. S Sundarraj

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 Sharadamma Vs Sri G Anand

Smt Radha Vs Sri G Anand

Smt Meenakshi Vs the Future General India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Nanjundaiah Vs Yogesh K M

Smt Pavithra M Vs Mahesh C

Rangaswamy Vs N Ramachandra