Partly allowed

G Srinivas S/O Rangaiah v. H.D.F.C Egro General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Karnataka HC5 Jul 2023MFA/11655/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Motor Vehicles First Appeal, the High Court enhanced compensation awarded to an injured claimant. The court corrected the notional income calculation based on Karnataka State Legal Services Authority guidelines and increased compensation on heads of pain, suffering, food, and loss of amenities, ordering a total of Rs. 3,83,500 with interest.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs. 3,83,500 with 6% interest from the date of filing, to be deposited by the insurance company within 60 days.

G Srinivas S/O Rangaiah Vs H.D.F.C Egro… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

NC: 2023:KHC:23069 MFA No. 11655 of 2012

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 11655 OF 2012 (MV)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

G SRINIVAS S/O RANGAIAH AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS R/O NO.209, 5TH CROSS, 10TH MAIN ROAD CHOWDESHWARI NAGAR, LAGGERE BANGALORE-58

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. B. J. ESHWARAPPA., ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

H.D.F.C EGRO, GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., 1ST FLOOR, H. M. GENEEVA HOUSE NO.14, CUNNINGHAM ROAD,

¶13

Digitally signed by HARSHITHA B

¶14

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶15

BANGALORE-52

¶16

MRS SOWBHAGYA

¶17

MAJOR, R/O BHAGYASHREE NILAYA MARUTHIL NAGAR, CIRCLE SARJAPUR, BANGALORE-562125

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SRI. D. VIJAYAKUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R1; V/O DATED 25/02/2014 NOTICE TO R2 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶20

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED5.10.2012 PASSED IN MVC

¶21

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:23069 MFA No. 11655 of 2012

¶22

NO.1692/2011 ON THE FILE OF XVIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, MACT-4, BANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶23

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

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

The appellant has filed this appeal against the

¶26

judgment and award passed in MVC No.1692/2011 on the file of the XVIII Addl. Judge court of Small Causes Member, MACT-4, Bangalore dated 05.10.2012 for enhancement of compensation.

¶27

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted his argument that the trial court has taken meager notional income of the injured. The trial court has not properly awarded the compensation on other heads. Accordingly, he seeks for enhancement of compensation.

¶28

As against this learned counsel appearing on behalf of Insurance company D.Vijayakumar has

¶29

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:23069 MFA No. 11655 of 2012

¶30

submitted that the tribunal has properly appreciated the evidence on record and awarded just compensation. That there is no grounds to interfere with the impugned award passed by the tribunal. On all these grounds, sought for dismissal of this appeal.

¶31

Having heard the arguments on both sides and perusal of the records the following points that would be arise for my consideration are:

¶32

1) Whether the appellant/claimant is entitled for enhancement of compensation as sought for?

¶33

2) What order or award?

¶34

My answer to the above points are as under:

¶35

Point No.1: Partly in the Affirmative

¶36

Point No.2: As per final order

¶37

RE.POINT NO.1 :

¶38

To substantiate the claim of the petitioner,

¶39

petitioner examined as PW1 and one Dr.B.S.Jayaram examined as PW2. One wound certificate marked as

¶40

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:23069 MFA No. 11655 of 2012

¶41

Ex.P.5. Discharge summary marked Ex.6, four photos and CD marked as Ex.P.7 and Ex.P.7(a) respectively. 147 medical bills marked as Ex.P8, 57 prescriptions marked as Ex.P.9, inpatient records marked as Exs.P.10 and 11, disability certificate marked as Ex.P12 and four X-rays are marked as Ex.P13.

¶42

6.1. A perusal of Ex.P.5, it is clear that the petitioner

¶43

has sustained the following injuries.

¶44

1) Lacerated wound over left forehead

¶45

2) Swelling over left eye

¶46

3) Lacerated wound over distal 1/3rd of left leg 4X3 cms

¶47

4) Tenderness over cervical region.

¶48

6.2. Ex.P.6 is the discharge summary issued by

¶49

Kempegowda Hospital and Research Center reveals that

¶50

the injured admitted to this hospital as inpatient in ID No.21215/10 and date of admission was 20.10.2010, date of operation on 29.10.2010 and 12.11.2010 and he was discharged on 29.11.2010. Claimant was admitted to the hospital as inpatient for 41 days. Ex.P.10 medical records inpatient records issued by KIMS hospital and research

¶51

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:23069 MFA No. 11655 of 2012

¶52

center. Ex.P.12 is the disability certificate in which doctor has opined that the petitioner is having disability of 23.7% to the whole-body. To substantiate this, PW2Dr.B.S.Jayaram also examined. Considering the nature of injuries and treatment taken by the petitioner, the tribunal has rightly observed that the claimant has sustained disability of 13% to the whole body.

¶53

The notional income of Rs.3,000/-, which is contrary to the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority. In view of the chart issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, the notional income would be Rs.5,500/and the approximate multiplier applicable to the age of the claimant is 15. Hence, it comes to Rs.5,500/-X12X15X13%=1,28,700/-, which is rounded to Rs.1,29,000/-. Accordingly, claimant is entitled for Rs.1,29,000/- towards compensation for loss of future earning due to disability.

¶54

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:23069 MFA No. 11655 of 2012

¶55

Considering the nature of injuries, pain and

¶56

agony, it is just and proper to award compensation on the

¶57

following heads.

¶58

Sl.No.	Head	By Tribunal (in Rs.)	By this court (in Rs.)
1.	Pain and suffering	30,000/-	50,000/-
2.	Food, nourishment attendant charges and convenience	-	15,000/-
3.	Medical expenses	1,29,000/-	1,29,000/-
4.	Loss of earning during the period of treatment	9,000/-	16,500/-
5.	Loss of future earning	70,200/-	1,28,000/-
6.	Future medical expenses	10,000/-	10,000/- (As awarded by the tribunal)
7.	Loss of amenities and future unhappiness	15,000/-	35,000/-
	Total	2,63,200/-	3,83,500/-

¶59

8.1. The petitioner/claimant is entitled for the total

¶60

compensation of Rs.3,83,500/- as against Rs.2,63,200/awarded by the tribunal. Hence, the petitioner is entitled for enhanced compensation of Rs.1,20,300/- with interest

¶61

@ 6% p.a.

¶62

¶63

NC: 2023:KHC:23069 MFA No. 11655 of 2012

¶64

RE.POINT NO.2 :

¶65

For the aforesaid reasons and discussions, I

¶66

proceed to pass the following

¶67

ORDER

¶68

1. Appeal is partly allowed.

¶69

1. Appellant is entitled for compensation of Rs.3,83,500/- (Rupees Three Lakhs Eighty Three Thousand Five Hundred only) with 6% interest from the date of filing this petition till its realisation.

¶70

1. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation.

¶71

1. Respondent No.1-Insurance company is directed to deposit the award amount with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. within 60 days from the date of filing this petition till its realization.

¶72

8 - NC: 2023:KHC:23069 MFA No. 11655 of 2012

¶73

1. Draw an award accordingly.

¶74

1. All other terms and conditions stipulated by the

¶75

tribunal shall stand intact.

¶76

Sd/JUDGE

¶77

¶78

CT: HDN

G Srinivas S/O Rangaiah v. H.D.F.C Egro General Insurance Co. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G Srinivas S/O Rangaiah v. H.D.F.C Egro General Insurance Co. Ltd.

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

Sri H M Karun Vs M/S SBI General Insurance

General Manager Vs Prakash N

Sri Puttaswamy Vs Sri Umesh

Shantha Vs Kamalamma

Hanumanthegowda Vs the Manager

Sri v S Subramaniam @ Subramani Vs M/S Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd.