Partly allowed

Prashanta Kumar Sahu v. Shashikanta Patra

Karnataka HC6 Dec 2023MFA/3749/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This miscellaneous first appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award enhanced compensation for a motorcycle rider injured in an accident. The Court modified the award by increasing amounts for pain and sufferings, future medical expenses, and loss of amenities while confirming medical and income loss heads.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to a total of Rs. 12,51,571/- including increased amounts for pain and sufferings, loss of amenities, and future medical expenses.

Prashanta Kumar Sahu Vs Shashikanta Patra — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:44174 MFA No. 3749 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 6^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3749 OF 2022 (MV)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

PRASHANTA KUMAR SAHU S/O BHAJAKISHORE SAHU AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R/AT NEAR SHANIMAHATAMA TEMPLE YADAVANAHALLI, ANEKAL TALUK BENGALURU URBAN NATIVE ADDRESS JIRINA ADIA,BANT BHADRAK, ODISHA

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. JAGADEESH GUNDAPPA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. SREENIVASAIAH A.,ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by DHANALAKSHMI MURTHY Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

SHASHIKANTA PATRA S/O SUBAS PATRA AT-ANADHUVA, PO ADALPANKA VIA BONTH, BHADRAK, ORISSA - 756 114.

¶13

THE MANAGER CHOLA MS GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. NO.4-9, 6TH FLOOR GOLDEN HEIGHT BUILDING STAR BAZAR, RAJKUMAR ROAD RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI.B.PRADEEP., ADVOCATE FOR R2: NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED: 06.12.2023)

¶16

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:44174 MFA No. 3749 of 2022

¶17

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 16.12.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO. 7607/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT, XVIII ADDITIONAL JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU CITY (SCCH-4), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶18

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

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

This appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short) has been filed by the claimant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 16.12.2021 passed by the Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru City (for short, ‘the Tribunal’) in MVC No.7607/2019.

¶21

Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal

¶22

briefly stated are that on 15.11.2019 at about 8.30 p.m. the claimant was proceeding on motorcycle bearing registration No.OD-22/L-0760 near Yadavanahalli Gate on Bengaluru NH-7. At that time, the rider of the said motorcycle rode the same at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, dashed to the person standing on

¶23

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:44174 MFA No. 3749 of 2022

¶24

the side of the road. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the claimant fell down, sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized.

¶25

The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act seeking compensation. It was pleaded that he spent huge amount towards medical expenses, conveyance, etc. It was further pleaded that the accident occurred purely on account of the rash and negligent riding of the offending vehicle by its rider.

¶26

On service of notice, the respondent No.2 appeared through counsel and filed written statement in which the averments made in the petition were denied. The age, avocation and income of the claimant and the medical expenses are denied. It was pleaded that the driver of the offending vehicle did not have valid driving licence as on the date of the accident. It was further pleaded that the liability is subject to terms and conditions of the policy. It was further pleaded that the quantum of compensation claimed by the claimant is exorbitant.

¶27

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:44174 MFA No. 3749 of 2022

¶28

Hence, he sought for dismissal of the petition. The respondent No.1 did not appear before the Tribunal inspite of service of notice and was placed ex-parte.

¶29

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter recorded the evidence. The claimant himself was examined as PW2 and Dr.S.A.Somashekara as PW4 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P20. On behalf of the respondents, neither any witness was examined nor got exhibited documents. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent riding of the offending vehicle by its rider, as a result of which, the claimant sustained injuries. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.11,40,211/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, this appeal has been filed.

¶30

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:44174 MFA No. 3749 of 2022

¶31

The learned counsel for the claimant has raised

¶32

the following contentions:

¶33

(i) Firstly, PW-4, the doctor has stated in his evidence that the claimant has suffered disability of 70% to left lower limb and 35% to whole body. But the Tribunal has erred in taking the whole body disability at only 24%.

¶34

(ii) Secondly, due to the accident, the claimant has sustained grievous injuries. He was treated as inpatient for a period of 10 days. Even after discharge from the hospital, he was not in a position to discharge his regular work. He suffered lot of pain during treatment and he has to suffer the disability and unhappiness throughout his life. Considering the same, the compensation granted by the Tribunal under the heads of 'loss of amenities', 'pain and sufferings' and other incidental expenses are on the lower side.

¶35

(iii) Thirdly, considering the evidence of the doctor and the injuries suffered by the claimant, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head

¶36

¶37

NC: 2023:KHC:44174 MFA No. 3749 of 2022

¶38

'future medical expenses' is also on the lower side. Hence,

¶39

he sought for allowing the appeal.

¶40

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company has raised the following contentions:

¶41

(i) Firstly, PW-4, the doctor has stated in his evidence that the claimant has suffered disability of 70% to left lower limb and 35% to whole body. The Tribunal rightly assessed the whole body disability at 1/3^rd of limb disability, i.e., 24%.

¶42

(ii) Secondly, the injuries suffered by the claimant are minor in nature. He was inpatient for only 10 days. Considering the evidence of the doctor and the injuries suffered by the claimant, the overall compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable.

¶43

(iii) Considering the evidence of the doctor and the injuries suffered by the claimant, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head 'future medical expenses' is just and reasonable. Hence, he sought for dismissal of the appeal.

¶44

¶45

NC: 2023:KHC:44174 MFA No. 3749 of 2022

¶46

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶47

Perused the judgment and award.

¶48

It is not in dispute that the claimant suffered injuries in the accident occurred on 15.11.2019 due to rash and negligent riding of the motorcycle bearing registration No.OD-22/L-0760 by its rider.

¶49

Due to the accident the claimant has suffered left intratrochonteric fracture with distal femur – sepsis with DIC and other multiple injuries. The claimant was inpatient for 10 days. PW-4, the doctor has stated in his evidence that the claimant has suffered disability of 70% to left lower limb and 35% to whole body. Therefore, taking into consideration the deposition of the doctor, considering the limb disability, the Tribunal has rightly assessed the whole body disability at 24%. The Tribunal has rightly assessed the notional income at Rs.14,000/-. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head 'loss of dependency' at Rs.7,25,760/- is just and reasonable. Due to the accident, the claimant has suffered grievous

¶50

8 - NC: 2023:KHC:44174 MFA No. 3749 of 2022

¶51

injuries, he has suffered lot of pain during treatment and he has to suffer with the disability and unhappiness throughout his life. Considering the same, I am inclined to enhance the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of 'pain and sufferings' from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.65,000/-, ‘loss of income during laid-up period and attendant charges’ from Rs.18,640/- to Rs.50,000/- and 'loss of amenities' from Rs.10,000/- to Rs.50,000/-. The claimant has examined the doctor, who in his testimony stated that the claimant requires to undergo surgery for removal of implants on both sites and it costs around Rs.1,50,000/-. Hence, I am inclined to enhance the sum awarded by the Tribunal under the head of ‘future medical expenses’ from Rs.50,000/to Rs.75,000/-. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is just and reasonable.

¶52

Thus, the claimant is entitled to the following compensation:

¶53

¶54

NC: 2023:KHC:44174 MFA No. 3749 of 2022

¶55

Compensation under different Heads	As awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.)	As awarded by this Court (Rs.)
Pain and sufferings	50,000	65,000
Medical expenses	2,75,811	2,75,811
conveyance charges	10,000	10,000
Loss of income during laid up period and attendant charges	18,640	50,000
Food nourishment, attendant charges and loss of amenities	10,000	50,000
Loss of future income	7,25,760	7,25,760
Future medical expenses	50,000	75,000
Total	11,40,211	12,51,571

¶56

In view of the above, I pass the following order:

¶57

(i) The appeal is allowed in part.

¶58

(ii) The judgment of the claims Tribunal is modified. The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.12,51,571/- in place of Rs.11,40,211/- awarded by the

¶59

Tribunal.

¶60

10 - NC: 2023:KHC:44174 MFA No. 3749 of 2022

¶61

(iii) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount along with interest @ 6% p.a.

¶62

from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment excluding interest for the compensation awarded under the head of 'future medical

expenses'.

Sd/JUDGE

List No.: 3 Sl No.: 10

Prashanta Kumar Sahu v. Shashikanta Patra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prashanta Kumar Sahu v. Shashikanta Patra

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

R Basavaraju Vs J Ramaiah

Smt. Rani Shashikala Devi Vs Tower Vision India Pvt. Ltd.

Sri. Manjunath. a. S. Vs Sri. Arjun. G. K.

Sri Sunil Kumar C Vs the Manager Hdfc Ergo Insurance Co. Ltd.

Venkatesh E Vs the Managing Director Bmtc

Smt R Ambika Vs the Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd.