Partly allowed

Smt. Thahira Banu v. Mr. Prabhakara Acharya

Karnataka HC12 Dec 2023MFA/327/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court enhanced the compensation awarded to a motor accident claimant due to three grievous injuries and loss of amenities, allowing the appeal in part. The award was increased from approximately Rs. 1.52 lakh to Rs. 2.51 lakh, with interest directed to be paid.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs.2,51,452/- with interest at 6% p.a.; respondent insurance company to deposit the amount within eight weeks.

Smt. Thahira Banu Vs Mr. Prabhakara Acharya — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:45215 MFA No. 327 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 327 OF 2019 (MV-I)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. THAHIRA BANU, D/O. KASIM SAHEB, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, R/AT NEHAD, ASHIYANA, CHOKADI RAILWAY BRIDGE, KATAPADY POST, YENAGUDDE VILLAGE, UDUPI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 101.

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. GANESHA R, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by SUVARNA T Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

MR. PRABHAKARA ACHARYA, S/O. SEENA ACHARYA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT H. NO. 5-90, MOODABETTU, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT - 576 101.

¶13

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., JEWEL PLAZA, MARUTHI VEETHIKA ROAD, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT - 576 101.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI. C. SHANKAR REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2; VIDE ORDER DATED 06.07.2022 NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH)

¶16

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:45215 MFA No. 327 of 2019

¶17

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 06/06/2018, PASSED IN MVC NO.925/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, UDUPI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶18

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

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

Aggrieved by the award passed in

¶21

M.V.C.No.925/2016 dated *06.06.2018 on the file of Prl.

¶22

Senior Civil Judge & Addl. MACT, Udupi, the claimant is before this Court. The claim petition was filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.8,50,000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant in the accident.

¶23

It is the case of the claimant that he is aged

¶24

about 62 years, working as a coolie and earning an amount of Rs.500/- per day. As per the doctor, he had sustained joint depression fracture lateral tibial condyle left, closed fracture base of 1st metacarpal, fracture

¶25

*Corrected vide chamber order dated: 02.09.2024.

¶26

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:45215 MFA No. 327 of 2019

¶27

superior and inferior pubic ramus left and contusion left lower chest wall. He had sustained three grievous injuries and one simple injury. According to the doctor, he had sustained 17% disability.

¶28

The Court below considering the fact that there is

¶29

no evidence to show the income of the claimant and he is aged 62 years suffering with hypertension and diabetes had granted compensation under the following heads:

¶30

	Heads	Co	mpensation Awarded
1.	Pain and Sufferings	Rs.	40,000/-
2.	Medical expenses	Rs.	72,952/-
3.	Loss of amenities	Rs.	10,000/-
4.	Disability	Rs.	25,000/-
5.	Food, attendant and conveyance charges	Rs.	5,000/-
	TOTAL	Rs.	1,52,952/-

¶31

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:45215 MFA No. 327 of 2019

¶32

Learned counsel appearing for the claimant submits that when the doctor had deposed that the claimant had sustained 17% disability to the limb, the Court below ought to have considered the said disability and by applying the multiplier, the Court below ought to have granted the compensation. It is submitted that even for the loss of income during the laid up period, no amount is granted. He further submits that when the claimant had sustained three grievous injuries, only an amount of Rs.40,000/- is granted under the head of pain and suffering which is on the lower side. It is submitted that the compensation that was awarded by the Tribunal is not just and reasonable.

¶33

Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance

¶34

Company submits that the Court below considering the evidence on record had rightly granted the compensation and no grounds are made out for seeking enhancement of the compensation. It is submitted that there was no evidence on record to show the income of the claimant.

¶35

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:45215 MFA No. 327 of 2019

¶36

The claimant is aged 62 years, he was having other ailments, the Court below had rightly not considered future prospects and applied the multiplier.

¶37

Having heard the learned counsel on either side,

¶38

perused the entire material on record. In this case, the claimant had sustained three grievous injuries. Hence, under the head of pain and suffering he is entitled for an amount of Rs.60,000/- . Then towards medical expenses, the Court below had granted an amount of Rs.72,952/which is based on the evidence and no interference is called for. Then coming to the loss of income during the laid up period, as this is an accident of the year 2016, according to the claimant, he was working as a coolie and without any evidence this Court is inclined to consider the income at Rs.9,500/-. For the injuries sustained by him, it would take three months time to recover and he is entitled for an amount of Rs.28,500/- under the head of loss of income during the laid up period .

¶39

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:45215 MFA No. 327 of 2019

¶40

Though the doctor had deposed that there is 17% disability to the limb, he had stated that the fractures were united. Considering the age, ailments, the Court below instead of granting loss of future income, granted loss of amenities and compensation under the head of disability i.e., towards loss of amenities an amount of Rs.10,000/-

¶41

and towards disability an amount of Rs.25,000/-. Considering the age and the injuries sustained by the claimant, this Court is inclined to grant an amount of Rs.25,000/- under the head of loss of amenities and under the head of disability an amount of Rs.35,000/- is granted. Towards food, attendant charges, conveyance charges, the Court below had granted Rs.5000/- which is on the lower side. Considering the three grievous injuries sustained by the claimant, he is entitled for an amount of Rs.25,000/- towards food, attendant and conveyance charges .

¶42

In the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.MEKALA vs. M.

¶43

7 - NC: 2023:KHC:45215 MFA No. 327 of 2019

¶44

MALATHI AND ANOTHER¹ , the claimant is entitled for an

¶45

amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses . Altogether, the claimant is entitled for compensation of an amount of Rs.2,51,452/- .

¶46

The claimant is therefore, entitled to the

¶47

compensation under the following heads:

¶48

	Heads		C	ompensation Awarded
1.	Pain and Sufferings	:	Rs.	60,000/-
2.	Medical expenses	:	Rs.	72,952/-
3.	Loss of income during the laid up period	:	Rs.	28,500/-
4.	Disability	:	Rs.	35,000/-
5.	Food, attendant and conveyance charges	:	Rs.	20,000/-
6.	Loss of amenities	:	Rs.	25,000/-
7.	Legal Expenses	:	Rs.	10,000/-
	TOTAL	:	Rs.	2,51,452/-

¶49

1 (2014) 11 SCC 178

¶50

8 - NC: 2023:KHC:45215 MFA No. 327 of 2019

¶51

Accordingly, the appeal of the claimant is allowed-in-part , by enhancing the compensation from an amount of Rs.1,52,952/- to Rs.2,51,452/- setting aside the award passed in M.V.C.No.925/2016 dated

¶52

*06.06.2018 .

¶53

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

¶54

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.

¶55

iii. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith without any delay.

¶56

*Corrected vide chamber order dated: 02.09.2024.

¶57

9 - NC: 2023:KHC:45215 MFA No. 327 of 2019

¶58

iv. No costs.

¶59

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶60

SD/JUDGE

¶61

MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 45 CT: BHK

Smt. Thahira Banu v. Mr. Prabhakara Acharya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Thahira Banu v. Mr. Prabhakara Acharya

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

Mohammed Yunus Vs Sri Nagesh

Sri Sundhara Raj C Vs M/S the New India Assurance Co. Ltd.

Sri. Rudresh Vs the Branch Manager

Kamala Vs S. v. Yogish

M/S United India Vs Shekara

Legal Manager Vs Sri G Chowdappa