Partly allowed

The Division Controller v. Mohan Upendra Achari

Karnataka HC22 Aug 2023MFA/21297/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Karnataka High Court modified a motor vehicle accident compensation award. It reduced medical expenses but recalculated loss of future income and amenities, raising total compensation to Rs.2,23,700. The insurance company's appeal was dismissed while the claimant's cross objection was partly allowed.

What did the court decide?

Modified the compensation award to a total of Rs.2,23,700 including interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition.

The Division Controller Vs Mohan Upendra Achari — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9336 MFA No. 21297 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100123 of 2014

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 22^ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.21297/2012(MV-I) C/W MFA CROSS OBJ NO.100123/2014

¶8

IN MFA NO.21297/2012:

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

THE DIVISION CONTROLLER, N.W.K.R.T.C. SIRSI DIVISION, SIRSI, R/BY RESPONDENT NO.2 BEFORE TRIBUNAL MANAGING DIRECTOR, N.W.K.R.T.C. CENTRAL OFFICE, GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI, AUTHORIZED BY CHIEF LAW OFFICERS N.W.K.R.T.C CENTRAL OFFICER, HUBLI.

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

(BY SRI MADANMOHAN M. KHANNUR, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by SUJATA SUBHASH PAMMAR

¶15

SRI MOHAN UPENDRA ACHARI, AGE: 32 YEARS, OCC: CARPENTER, R/O: MANJUGUNI, TQ: SIRSI, DIST: U.K. PIN: 581 402.

¶16

…RESPONDENT (BY SRI SHASHANK S. HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

¶17

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT, 1988, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT AMD AWARD PASSED BY THE ADDITIONAL MACT SIRSI IN MVC NO.130/2010 DATED 28.12.2011.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9336 MFA No. 21297 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100123 of 2014

¶20

IN MFA.CROB.NO.100123/2014:

¶21

BETWEEN:

¶22

SRI MOHAN UPENDRA ACHARI, AGE ABOUT 34 YEARS, OCC: CARPENTER, R/O: MANJUGUNI, SIRSI, U.K.

¶23

…CROSS OBJECTOR

¶24

(BY SRI SHASHANK HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

¶25

AND:

¶26

THE DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, N.W.K.R.T.C., SIRSI,

¶27

THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, N.W.K.R.T.C. HUBLI,

¶28

…RESPONDENTS

¶29

(BY SRI MADAN MOHAN M. KHANNUR, ADVOCATE)

¶30

THIS MFA CROB IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE, PRAYING TO MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.12.2011 IN M.V.C.NO.130/2010 PASSED BY THE COURT OF THE ADDITIONAL MACT, SIRSI, AND ALLOW THE CROSS OBECTION BY ENHANCING THE COMPENSATION, IN THE INTEREST JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶31

THESE MFA CROB AND APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶32

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9336 MFA No. 21297 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100123 of 2014

¶33

¶34

JUDGMENT

¶35

MFA No.21297/2012 is filed by the NWKRTC, Sirsi questioning the negligence and reducing quantum of compensation.

¶36

MFA Crob.No.100123/2014 is filed in MFA

¶37

No.21297/2012 by the claimant for enhancement of compensation.

¶38

The nature and occurrence of the accident, coverage of the offending vehicle by respondent-Insurance Company is neither in question nor in dispute.

¶39

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶40

In the present case, the claimant was traveling as pillion rider on the motorcycle and at that time, NWKRTC bus came from opposite direction and dashed to the motorcycle of the claimant due to which, the claimant fell on the road and sustained injuries. Complaint is lodged against the driver of KSRTC Bus. The police records prove

¶41

- 4 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:9336 MFA No. 21297 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100123 of 2014

¶42

that the motorcycle rider was on his correct side but driver of the NWKRTC bus drove towards wrong side and hit the motorcycle. Therefore, the Tribunal is correct and justified in holding that driver of NWKRTC bus is completely rash and negligent and caused the accident.

¶43

In the present case, the claimant had sustained comminuted fracture to the right leg tibia which is grievous in nature. Claimant is a carpenter by profession. The compensation granted under the head pain and suffering, is found to be correct and kept intact.

¶44

The compensation under the head medical expenses, food and special diet charges is on higher side and contrary to the medical evidence on record. Therefore, the compensation awarded is reduced to Rs.27,100/under the head medical expenses and hospital charges.

¶45

The compensation of Rs.10,000/- is awarded under

¶46

the head food nutrition, conveyance charges is found to be correct and same is kept intact.

¶47

¶48

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9336 MFA No. 21297 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100123 of 2014

¶49

A compensation of Rs.30,000/- is awarded towards

¶50

loss of amenities.

¶51

The accident is occurred in the year 2010. Therefore, notional income would be Rs.5,500/- per month. Claimant has suffered commuted fracture to the right leg tibia and he has suffered physical disability of 1018%. Claimant being carpenter by profession, it requires physical strength while doing carpenter work. Therefore, the Tribunal is correct in holding functional disability at 10%.

¶52

The claimant was aged 35 years. Appropriate multiplier is 16. Therefore, the loss of future income due to disability is reassessed and quantified as below:

¶53

Rs.5,500/-X10/100X16X12=Rs.1,05,600-00

¶54

Further, a compensation of Rs.11,000/-(Rs.5500 X 2)

¶55

is awarded towards loss of income during the period of treatment.

¶56

¶57

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9336 MFA No. 21297 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100123 of 2014

¶58

13. Thus, in all the appellant/claimant is entitled to a

¶59

total compensation as determined by this Court is as

¶60

follows:

¶61

Sl.No.	Particulars	Amount Rs.
1.	Towards loss of future income due to disability	1,05,600-00
2	Towards medical expenses, food and special diet(Rs,27,098/- rounded off to Rs.27,100/-)	27,100-00
3	Towards attendants and conveyance charges	10,000-00
4	Towards Loss of amenities	30,000-00
5	Towards loss of income during laid up period	11,000-00
6	Towards pain and suffering (Kept in tact)	40,000-00
		2,23,700-00

¶62

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following

¶63

ORDER

¶64

MFA No.21297/2012 filed by the Insurance

¶65

Company is dismissed.

¶66

¶67

NC: 2023:KHC-D:9336 MFA No. 21297 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100123 of 2014

¶68

MFA Crob. No.100123/2014 filed by the

¶69

claimant is allowed in part.

¶70

The judgment and award dated 28.12.2011 passed in MVC No.130/2010 by the Addl. MACT Sirsi is modified to the extent as discussed above.

¶71

The appellant/claimant in MFA Crob.No.100123/2014 is entitled for total compensation of Rs.2,23,700-00 as against Rs. 1,90,600/- awarded by the Tribunal along

¶72

with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

¶73

No order as to costs.

¶74

Registry is directed to transmit the amount in deposit made by the insurance company to tribunal along TCR and with copy of this order forthwith.

¶75

8 - NC: 2023:KHC-D:9336 MFA No. 21297 of 2012 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100123 of 2014

¶76

Appellant claimant is not entitled for the

¶77

interest for the delayed period of 408 days in

¶78

filing the cross objection.

¶79

Draw award accordingly.

¶80

SD/JUDGE

¶81

HMB List No.: 2 Sl No.: 16 CT-ASC

The Division Controller v. Mohan Upendra Achari

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Division Controller v. Mohan Upendra Achari

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

Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Vs Basappa @ Basavaraj Maruti Magdum

P.Veerabhadrappa S/O Late Lingappa, Vs Mahantesh S/O Basavaraj Hugar

Rudragouda Vs Janabai W/O Yallappa Todakar

Smt. Basavaneewwa Vs the Divisional Controller

Smt. Shivaputra Bai Chakrad Vs Sri. Vinay Kumar S/O Suresh C

National Insurance Co., Ltd., Vs Sayeeda W/O Abdul Kareem