Partly allowed

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., v. Venkatesh

Karnataka HC27 Oct 2022MFA/878/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the insurance company's appeal in part against the Claims Tribunal's award. The court modified the total compensation amount and reduced the interest rate for future medical expenses, relying on a specific Division Bench precedent.

What did the court decide?

Compensation reduced to Rs. 8,93,698/-. Interest scaled down to 6% p.a. excluding future medical expenses. Deposit with reasonable time limit.

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., Vs Venkatesh — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

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

¶6

MFA No.878 OF 2021(MV)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., EAST WING, 5TH FLOOR NO.28,CENTENARY BUILDING M G ROAD, BENGALURU-560001 NOW REPRESENTED BY MANAGER LEGAL

¶9

...APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI.ASHOK N PATIL, ADV.)

¶11

AND:

¶12

1 . VENKATESH S/O VENKATARAMANAPPA AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS R/O PURASANAHALLI VILLAGE KASABA HOBLI MALUR TALUK-563130.

¶13

2 . ZAMEER PASHA S/O MAHABOOB PASHA MAJOR, R/O MARUTHI EXTENSION MALUR TOWN KOLAR DISTRICT-563130.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI. GOPAL KRISHNA N., ADV. FOR R1: NOTICE TO R2 SERVED BUT UNREPRESENTED)

¶16

¶17

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED. 20.03.2020, PASSED IN MVC NO.485/2015, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC., MALUR, AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.9,43,698/- WITH 8 PERCENT INTEREST P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL ITS COMPLETE PAYMENT.

¶18

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

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

This appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor

¶21

Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) has been filed by the Insurance Company being aggrieved by the judgment dated 20.03.2020 passed by the Senior Civil Judge & JMFC, Malur in MVC No.485/2015.

¶22

Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 19.05.2015 at about 08.30 p.m., in front of the Kumar Petrol Bunk, Malur Town,

¶23

when the claimant was riding his motorcycle bearing Registration No.KA-08-R-9240 cautiously on the left

¶24

¶25

side of the Malur-Hosur road, at that time, the driver of the Maruthi Zen Car bearing Registration No.KA-07M-2226 came from Hosur side at high speed and in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the motorcycle 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, 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 respondent No.2

¶28

appeared through counsel and filed written statement in which the averments made in the petition were

¶29

¶30

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, he sought for dismissal of the petition.

¶31

The respondent No.1 did not appear before the Tribunal inspite of service of notice and was placed ex-parte.

¶32

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties,

¶33

the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded the evidence. The claimant himself was examined as PW-1 and Dr.Krishan Prasad was examined as PW-2 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P242. On behalf of the respondents, one witness was examined as RW-1 and got exhibited a document namely Ex.R1. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held

¶34

¶35

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.9,43,698/- along with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed.

¶36

The learned counsel for the Insurance Company has raised following counter contentions:

¶37

Firstly, the injuries suffered by the claimant are minor in nature. He was treated as inpatient for a period of 12 days. 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. Considering the same, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the heads of 'pain and

¶38

¶39

sufferings' and other incidental expenses are on the higher side.

¶40

Secondly, even though PW-2, the doctor has deposed that the claimant required Rs.40,000/- for removal of implant and he required special stockings and Vaseline application on his skin grafted areas which will cost of Rs.7,000/- to Rs.8,000/- annually, but he has not produced any document even before

¶41

this Court to prove the same.

¶42

Thirdly, in view of the Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Ms.Joyeeta Bose and others

¶43

–v- Venkateshan.V and others (MFA 5896/2018 and connected matters disposed of on 24.8.2020), the rate of interest granted by the Tribunal at 8% p.a. on the compensation amount is on the higher side and the Tribunal has erred in granting interest for future medical expenses. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.

¶44

¶45

7. The learned counsel for the claimant has

¶46

raised the following contentions:

¶47

Firstly, even though the claimant claims that he was working as a labour in M/s. Krishna Concretes Products and earning Rs.15,000/- per month, but the Tribunal has taken the notional income as merely as Rs.6,000/- per month.

¶48

Secondly, due to the accident, the claimant has sustained grievous injuries. He was treated as inpatient for a period of 12 days. 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. Considering the same, the overall compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the heads of 'pain and sufferings' and other incidental expenses are just and reasonable.

¶49

¶50

Thirdly, due to the accident, he has undergone surgery. He required to undergo one more surgery for removal of implants. He also required special stockings and Vaseline application on his skin grafted areas which will cost of Rs.7,000/- to Rs.8,000/annually. Considering the same, the Tribunal has rightly granted Rs.1,00,000/- for ‘future medical expenses’. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.

¶51

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.

¶52

It is not in dispute that the claimant has sustained injuries in the road traffic accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

¶53

As per the Wound Certificate, the claimant has sustained type III B open fracture distal 1/3^rd right

¶54

¶55

tibia and fibula, anterior tibial+ posterior tibial yessels injury right leg, closed fracture base of 4^th metatarsal comminuted fracture right medial malleolus.

¶56

Even though the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of ‘pain and suffering’ is on higher side, but the compensation awarded under the head of ‘loss of income during the laid up period’ is on lower side. Considering the same, I am of the opinion that the overall compensation awarded by the Tribunal in both the heads are just and reasonable.

¶57

In respect of future medical expenses is concerned, the claimant has suffered above said injuries. He has examined the doctor. He deposed that the claimant required Rs.40,000/- for removal of implants. He also required special stockings and Vaseline application on his skin grafted areas which will cost of Rs.7,000/- to Rs.8,000/- annually. Considering the evidence of the doctor and the

¶58

¶59

injuries suffered by the claimant, I am of the opinion that the compensation awarded under the head of ‘future medical expenses’ has to be reduced from Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.50,000/-.

¶60

In the result, the appeal is allowed in part . The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified. The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.8,93,698/- as against Rs.9,43,698/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶61

In view of judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of ‘MS.JOYEETA BOSE’ , the interest awarded by the Tribunal at 9% is scale down to 6%.

¶62

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 excluding

¶63

¶64

interest for the compensation awarded under the head

¶65

of 'future medical expenses'.

¶66

The amount in deposit shall transmitted to the

¶67

Tribunal.

¶68

Sd/JUDGE

¶69

HA/-

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., v. Venkatesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd., v. Venkatesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Master Mohammed Thameem Vs Mr. Sachin S Suvarna

Mr.Savitram Vs Mr.Ravishankar

Smt Eramma Vs the Regional Manager

Pavan G R Vs Mahesh C S

M/S Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs Smt Revathi Shambu Shettigar

The Managing Director Vs Mallamma