Allowed

Harish U M @ Harisha Kumar v. Shekara C T

Karnataka HC9 Nov 2023MFA/3536/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal filed by a motor accident claimant against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Enhancing the disability to 90% and income to minimum wage, the Court awarded Rs. 36.30 lakhs instead of Rs. 6.08 lakhs, including future loss of income, pain and suffering, and attendant charges.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs. 36,30,800/- with 6% interest; 50% amount to be fixed in Nationalized bank for 20 years; Insurance co. to deposit within eight weeks.

Harish U M @ Harisha Kumar Vs Shekara C T — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:43870 MFA No. 3536 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3536 OF 2019 (MV-I)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI.HARISH U.M @ HARISHA KUMAR, S/O D.MANJEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, UDDURU VILLAGE, KASABA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK.

¶8

PRESENTLY R/O 2^ND STAGE, WATER TANK ROAD, JAYANAGARA, HASSAN TALUK.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SMT.KAVITHA H.C, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

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

¶13

SRI. SHEKARA C.T, S/O THIMMEGOWDA, DODDAGENIGERE POST, SHANTHIGRAMA HOBLI, HASSAN TALUK & DISTRICT.

¶14

THE MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., MANJUNATHESHWARA COMPLEX, OLD BUS STAND ROAD, HASSAN.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI. A.N. KRISHNASWAMY, ADVOCATE FOR R2; vide order dated 19.06.2022 notice to R1 is dispensed with)

¶17

¶18

NC: 2023:KHC:43870 MFA No. 3536 of 2019

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 20.08.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.596/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL AT HASSAN, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION AND ETC,.

¶20

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

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

This appeal is filed by the claimant aggrieved by the

¶23

Award passed in MVC No.596/2016, on the file of the Prl. Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Member, Addl. M.A.C.T, Hassan, dated 20.08.2018 whereby the Tribunal has

¶24

granted compensation of an amount of Rs.6,08,000/-.

¶25

The claim petition was filed seeking

¶26

compensation of an amount of Rs.25,00,000/- for the injuries and disability sustained by the claimant in the accident. In the accident on 01.11.2015, the petitioner

¶27

had sustained several injuries. According to the claimant, he was earning an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month from agriculture and milk vending business. The Court below considered the evidence of the Doctor that the claimant

¶28

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:43870 MFA No. 3536 of 2019

¶29

was admitted in the Janapriya Hospital, Hassan for two months and also has taken treatment at Manjunatha Ayurvedic hospital, Hassan for two months. As per the Doctor and Neuro Physiological assessment and his combined Neuro behavioral and cognitive disability was assessed at 39.44%, Carnial nerve disability at 12%, Motor and sensory disability at 50%. The doctor has assessed the total Neurological disability of the petitioner at 70%, the Court had considered the disability at 25% and considering the monthly income at Rs.6,500/-

¶30

awarded an amount of Rs.3,31,500/- under the head of loss of income due to disability. Then coming to the head of pain and suffering an amount of Rs.25,000/- is awarded, towards medical expenses Rs.2,00,000/-, Loss of amenities Rs.15,000/-, Attendant charges Rs.15,000/-, Food and nourishment charges Rs.15,000/- and towards loss of income during laid up period an amount of Rs.6,500/- is awarded. In all compensation of an amount of Rs.6,08,000/- was awarded by the Tribunal.

¶31

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:43870 MFA No. 3536 of 2019

¶32

Aggrieved there by appellant is before this Court. This Court by considering the submission of counsel for the appellant that the disability is not 30% as stated by the claimant, this Court has passed an order on 06.03.2023, observing that having regard to the medical evidence as suggested by the learned counsel for the Insurance Company, it would be appropriate to direct the claimant to subject himself to medical examination at Bowring Hospital, Bengaluru and they are directed to assess the clinical as well as functional disability of the claimant and

¶33

submit the report to the Court and further directed the claimant to appear before the hospital on 18.03.2023. Thereafter, another order was passed on 23.03.2023 observing that Bowring Hospital has addressed a communication that they do not have Neurological Department, hence the claimant should be referred to NIMHANS. Accordingly, this Court has directed the claimant to be present before NIMHANS on 29.03.2023. The NIMHANS as per the order passed by this Court had examined claimant and submitted a report before this

¶34

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:43870 MFA No. 3536 of 2019

¶35

Court dated 24.07.2023. The report reveals that they have assessed the claimant. On 04.07.2023, as per their assessment he had disability of 90%. Considering the report of the board this Court is inclined to consider the disability at 90%.

¶36

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that though the Doctor had opined that the claimant suffered 90% disability, functionally it is 100% disability. It is submitted that it is the case of the claimant that he was earning an amount of Rs.15,000/- by doing agricultural and Coolie work , the Court had considered only Rs.6,500/per month, which is on the lower side. Learned counsel

¶37

submits that without any evidence , the Court ought to have taken Rs.8,000/- as per minimum wages as notified by the Government. It is further submitted that the amount granted and entire loss of future income is not reasonable, further under the head of pain and suffering, loss of amenities the amount granted is not reasonable. It is submitted that no amount is granted under the head of

¶38

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:43870 MFA No. 3536 of 2019

¶39

loss of marriage prospects and as the claimant had suffered 90% disability and required an attendant, no reasonable amount was granted under those heads and submits that towards food and nourishment also the amount that was granted is on the lower side.

¶40

The learned counsel submits that the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of AYUSH VS. BRANCH MANAGER, RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND ANOTHER¹ and in case of KAJAL V/S JAGADISH CHAND & ORS² had considered the attendant charges and by applying the multiplier had granted the compensation. He submits that in this case also the above referred judgment squarely applies and he is entitled for compensation.

¶41

The learned counsel appearing for the Insurance

¶42

Company submits that in so far as the attendant is concerned there is no evidence to show that there was requirement of the attendant charges for the claimant.

¶43

1 2022 ACJ 1006

¶44

2 AIR 2020 SC 776

¶45

¶46

NC: 2023:KHC:43870 MFA No. 3536 of 2019

¶47

It is submitted that even if any amount is granted under the head of attendant charges it will not fetch any interest. It is submitted that even the future prospects also will not fetch any interest. Further it is submitted that the Court below had rightly granted the compensation.

¶48

Heard the learned counsels on either sides, perused the entire material on record.

¶49

Insofar as the disability is concerned, in the light of the report placed before this Court. This Court is inclined to take 90% as disability. Then coming to the income as per the minimum wages Act, as there is no evidence, the Court is inclined to take the income at Rs.8,000/- per month. He is aged about 27 years and the future prospects have to be taken at 40% and it would come to Rs.3,200/- i.e., Rs.11,200/-. When it comes to

¶50

the disability and when the doctor has stated that it is 90% disability functionally it has to be taken as 100% disability by applying the multiplier 17, the loss of future income would come to (11,200x12x17) Rs.22,84,800/-.

¶51

¶52

NC: 2023:KHC:43870 MFA No. 3536 of 2019

¶53

Pain and sufferings, loss of amenity and loss of marriage prospects in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the judgment referred to supra applying the same to the particular facts and circumstances of the case, wherein he had sustained functional disability of 100%. This Court is inclined to grant an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- on each head. Towards attendant benefits considering the requirement of an attendant throughout his life and considering the income at Rs.4,000/-, and by applying the multiplier (Rs.4,000x12x17) and it comes to

¶54

Rs.8,16,000/-. Hence, he is entitled for an amount of Rs.8,16,000/- under the head of attendant charges. Then coming to the medical bills an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- is granted by the Court below and this Court finds no reason to interfere. Under the head of food, nourishment and conveyance, this Court is inclined to grant an amount of Rs.20,000/-.

¶55

In the light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of V.MEKALA –vs-

¶56

9 - NC: 2023:KHC:43870 MFA No. 3536 of 2019

¶57

M.MALATHI AND ANOTHER³ , the claimant is entitled for

¶58

an amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses. All together the claimant is entitled for an amount of Rs.36,30,800/-.

¶59

The claimant is therefore, entitled to the compensation under the following heads:

¶60

	Heads		Com Awa	pensation rded
1.	Loss of future income	:	Rs.	22,84,800.00
2.	Pain and suffering	:	Rs.	1,00,000.00
3.	Loss of amenity	:	Rs.	1,00,000.00
4.	Loss of marriage prospects	:	Rs.	1,00,000.00
5.	Attendant benefits 4000x12x17	:	Rs.	8,16,000.00
6.	Food and Nourishment and Conveyance	:	Rs.	20,000.00
7.	Medical Bill	:	Rs.	2,00,000.00
8.	Legal Expenses	:	Rs.	10,000.00
	Total	:	Rs.	36,30,800.00

¶61

3 (2014) 11 SCC 178

¶62

10 - NC: 2023:KHC:43870 MFA No. 3536 of 2019

¶63

Accordingly, the Appeal is allowed , by enhancing the compensation from an amount of

¶64

Rs.6,08,000/- to Rs.36,30,800/-.

¶65

i) The enhancement amount would carry

¶66

Interest at 6%. As far as the attendant benefit is concerned it will carry interest from the date of order.

¶67

ii) 50% of the amount shall be kept in fixed deposit in any Nationalized bank the claimant would be entitled for the interest on the said amount for a period of 20 years. Whenever it is necessary, the claimant shall move an appropriate application before the Tribunal in case of any necessity and the Tribunal shall pass appropriate order considering the same.

¶68

iii) The respondent - insurance company shall

¶69

deposit the amount within a period of eight

¶70

11 - NC: 2023:KHC:43870 MFA No. 3536 of 2019

¶71

weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. On such deposit, the claimant is entitled to withdraw the balance fifty percent amount without furnishing any security.

¶72

iv) 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.

¶73

v) No costs.

¶74

12.Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶75

SD/JUDGE

¶76

RMS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 111 CT.: RMS

Harish U M @ Harisha Kumar v. Shekara C T

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harish U M @ Harisha Kumar v. Shekara C T

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

Mr Ravish Kumar Vs Mr. Prabhakar

M/S Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs D Raju

Lokesh Vs H N Byrappa

Smt. S. Parvathy Vs Bajaj Allianz Gen. Ins. Co. Ltd.

Sri. Papanna @ Puttaswamy Vs Sri. G N Ramesh

Smt Madhuri Pandey Vs National Insurance Co. Ltd.