Partly allowed

Chinnappaiah @ Chikkappaiah v. Ramesh

Karnataka HC19 Dec 2023MFA/2647/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court enhanced motor accident compensation from Rs.7.55 lakhs to Rs.14.53 lakhs. Court increased disability percentage to 70% and awarded amounts for future income loss, pain, amenities, and medical expenses including prosthesis costs.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs.14,53,269/- with interest at 6% p.a.; insurance company directed to deposit within eight weeks.

Chinnappaiah @ Chikkappaiah Vs Ramesh — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

NC: 2023:KHC:46404 MFA No. 2647 of 2018

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2647 OF 2018 (MV-I)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

CHINNAPPAIAH @ CHIKKAPPAIAH, S/O LATE NANJUNDAPPA, AGED 57 YEARS, R/AT AMBEDKARNAGARA, MANCHENAHALLI, GOWRIBIDANUR TALUK, CHIKKABALLAPUR DISTRICT - 561 212.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. D. NAGARAJA REDDY, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

RAMESH,

¶13

Digitally signed by JAI JYOTHI J Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

S/O LATE MUNIYAPPA, MAJOR, C/O Y N SRINIVAS, BEHIND T.B. CHIKKABALLAPURA TOWN, CHICKBALLAPUR - 562 101.

¶15

M/S. SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURNACE CO. LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, # 4/5, III FLOOR, S V ARCADE, BILEKAHALLI MAIN ROAD, OFF B G ROAD, I I M POST, BENGALURU - 560 076, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER.

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

(BY SRI. B. PRADEEP, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 14.12.2023 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶18

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:46404 MFA No. 2647 of 2018

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 08.01.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.5922/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE XXIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSE JUDGE, XXI ACMM, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU, (SCCH-25), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶20

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

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

This is an appeal filed by the claimant aggrieved by the award passed in M.V.C.No.5922/2016 dated 08.01.2018 by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal Court of Small Causes, at Bengaluru (SCCH-25). The claim petition was filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant in the accident.

¶23

The claimant was 51 years old as on the date of the accident and he was working as a Mason and earning an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month. The Tribunal had

¶24

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:46404 MFA No. 2647 of 2018

¶25

taken the income at Rs.8,000/- per month. According to the doctor, there is 85% whole body disability. The Tribunal had taken 50% as the disability and granted compensation as per the table below:

¶26

	Heads	C	ompensation Awarded
1.	Pain and Suffering	Rs.	1,00,000/-
2.	Medical expenses	Rs.	12,509/-
3.	Loss of future income	Rs.	5,28,000/-
4.	Loss of future amenities and happiness	Rs.	20,000/-
5.	Attendant, conveyance, food and nourishment charges	Rs.	20,000/-
6.	Future medical expenses	Rs.	75,000/-
	TOTAL	Rs.	7,55,509/-

¶27

Learned counsel appearing for the claimant submits that he was working as a Mason and he would not be in a position to do work because of the disability. When the doctor had stated that he had sustained 85% disability to the whole body, the Tribunal had taken 50%

¶28

¶29

NC: 2023:KHC:46404 MFA No. 2647 of 2018

¶30

as the whole body disability. He submits that the income that was taken was also on the lower side. He submits that under the head of loss of future amenities, pain and suffering, attendant, conveyance and food and nourishment charges, future medical expenses, the amounts that were granted by the Tribunal was on the lower side.

¶31

Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance Company submits that as per the Employees Compensation Act, amputation above the knee is 60% disability, but the doctor had deposed that he had sustained 85% disability and he submits that the disability cannot be taken as stated by the doctor. Learned counsel further submits that when there was no evidence on record, the Court below had rightly taken the income at Rs.8,000/- per month. It is submitted that no grounds are made out seeking enhancement of the compensation.

¶32

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:46404 MFA No. 2647 of 2018

¶33

In this case, the claimant had sustained injuries

¶34

and the right leg was amputated above the knee and he was working as a Mason. According to the doctor, the claimant had sustained 85% disability. The Tribunal had taken 50% disability and had not considered the future prospectus. Considering the occupation, age and the evidence of the doctor, this Court is inclined to take the 70% as the disability. The Tribunal went wrong in not granting the future prospectus. Considering that this accident of the year 2015, this Court is taking the income at Rs.9,000/- per month. Future prospectus at 10% would come to Rs.9,900x12x11x70/100 = Rs.9,14,760/- i.e., under the head of loss of future income due to disability .

¶35

Then coming to the head of pain and suffering, considering the amputation, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.1,50,000/- under the head of pain and suffering . Towards medical bills, the Court below had rightly granted the compensation. Then coming to the

¶36

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:46404 MFA No. 2647 of 2018

¶37

loss of future amenities and happiness, granting an amount of Rs.20,000/- in a case of this nature is on the lower side and this Court is granting an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- under the head of loss of future amenities and happiness . Then coming to the head of attendance, conveyance charges and food and nourishment, he was in hospital for 26 days and considering the injuries and recovery, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.30,000/- under the head of attendance, conveyance and food and nourishment .

¶38

Towards future medical expenses, according to the doctor, prosthesis is required and according to him, it would cost an amount of Rs.3,00,000/-. The Court below had granted an amount of Rs.75,000/- under the head of future medical expenses. Learned counsel relying on the

¶39

judgment in the case of Mohd. Sabeer @ Shabir Hussain vs Regional Manager, U.P. State Road

¶40

7 - NC: 2023:KHC:46404 MFA No. 2647 of 2018

¶41

Transport Corporation¹ , submits that at an age of 37, the Court had considered the requirement of change of prosthesis for three times and granted an amount of Rs.7,00,000/-. He submits that in this case, at least for two times, it has to be considered. The doctor himself had stated that it would cost an amount of Rs.3,00,000/-. Considering the evidence, this Court is granting an amount

¶42

of Rs.2,00,000/- towards future medical expenses . Then coming to the head of loss of income during the laid up period, no amounts were granted. Hence, for four months, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.36,000/- (i.e.,Rs.9,000x4) towards loss of income during the laid up period .

¶43

In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.MEKALA vs. M. MALATHI AND ANOTHER² , the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses .

¶44

1 (2022) 0 SCC 1230

¶45

2 (2014) 11 SCC 178

¶46

8 - NC: 2023:KHC:46404 MFA No. 2647 of 2018

¶47

Altogether, the claimant is entitled for compensation of an

¶48

amount of Rs.14,53,269/- .

¶49

The claimant is therefore, entitled to the

¶50

compensation under the following heads:

¶51

	Heads		C	ompensation Awarded
1.	Pain and Suffering	:	Rs.	1,50,000/-
2.	Medical bills	:	Rs.	12,509/-
3.	Loss of future income due to disability	:	Rs.	9,14,760/-
4.	Loss of future amenities and happiness	:	Rs.	1,00,000/-
5.	Attendance, conveyance and food and nourishment	:	Rs.	30,000/-
6.	Future medical expenses	:	Rs.	2,00,000/-
7.	Loss of income during the laid up period	:	Rs.	36,000/-
8.	Legal Expenses	:	Rs.	10,000/-
	TOTAL	:	Rs.	14,53,269/-

¶52

9 - NC: 2023:KHC:46404 MFA No. 2647 of 2018

¶53

Accordingly, the appeal of the claimant is allowed-in-part , by enhancing the compensation from an amount of Rs.7,55,509/to an amount of Rs.14,53,269/- setting aside the award passed in M.V.C.No.5922/2016 dated 08.01.2018.

¶54

i. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization.

¶55

ii. The respondent - Insurance Company shall deposit the amount within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount without furnishing any security.

¶56

iii. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified

¶57

NC: 2023:KHC:46404 MFA No. 2647 of 2018

¶58

10 -

¶59

copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith

¶60

without any delay.

¶61

iv. No costs.

¶62

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶63

SD/JUDGE

¶64

MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53 CT: BHK

Chinnappaiah @ Chikkappaiah v. Ramesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chinnappaiah @ Chikkappaiah v. Ramesh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Bajaj Alliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Lingappa R

The Branch Manager Vs Basavaraja M

Sri. K Tharun Raj Vs Sri L. Satish

Dinesh N Vs Sri. Nanda Kumar v

Chandrashekar Vs Smt Indramma

Sri Shivanaga Vs Sri M B Shiva Reddy