Partly allowed

Sri. Ravi v. Girish D S

Karnataka HC21 Dec 2023MFA/6400/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka, in a miscellaneous first appeal under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, partially allowed the appeal of the claimant. The court enhanced the tribunal's award from Rs. 8,50,200 to Rs. 9,62,200 by granting additional compensation for nourishment, attendant charges, transportation, and loss of earning to parents, besides the original heads. Interest at 6% p.a. was

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs. 9,62,200; Interest at 6% p.a. directed; Insurance company to deposit amount within eight weeks.

Sri. Ravi Vs Girish D S — Medical Negligence | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:46816 MFA No. 6400 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21^ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.6400 OF 2019 (MV-I)

¶4

BETWEEN:

¶5

SRI. RAVI S/O SOMASHEKAR AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS DOLLENAHALLI VILLAGE C.S. PURA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT.

¶6

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

¶7

(BY SRI. SUBRAMANYA PRASAD T.V. ADV.,)

¶8

AND:

¶9

GIRISH D.S. S/O NARASIMHAIAH R/O NO.7, DOLLENAHALLI VILLAGE C.S.PURA HOBLI, GUBBI TALUK TUMKUR DISTRICT.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

THE MANAGER SRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED., BRANCH OFFICE NO.5 3RD FLOOR, MONARCH CHAMBERS OPP. INFANTRY WEDDING HALL INFANTRY ROAD, BANGALORE.

¶12

…RESPONDENTS

¶13

(BY SRI. B.C. SHIVANNEGOWDA, ADV., FOR R2 R1 SERVED & UNREPRESENTED)

¶14

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:46816 MFA No. 6400 of 2019

¶15

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 16.10.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO.146/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, ADDITIONAL MACT, GUBBI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶16

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

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

This Appeal is filed by the claimant aggrieved by the award passed in M.V.C.No.146/2017 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge & Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Gubbi, dated 16.10.2018, whereby the Tribunal has granted an amount of Rs.8,50,200/- as compensation. The claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of the compensation.

¶19

The claim petition was filed seeking compensation of Rs.20,00,000/-. According to the claimant, who is represented by his father, is 15 years old as on the date of accident, he has sustained injuries in the accident that took place on 20.06.2016. The Doctor, who was examined as PW-2, has stated that he has treated the claimant for fracture of distal third right femur where a

¶20

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:46816 MFA No. 6400 of 2019

¶21

spanning external fixator was applied and skin grafting was done and referred to higher centre and external fixator was removed on 16.08.2016 and open reduction and fracture fixation was done on 13.08.2016. According to the Doctor, when he examined the patient on 27.06.2018, he found complaints regarding pain over the right thigh and knee with difficulty to walk on plain surface, difficulty in claiming stairs and unable to stand on both legs. According to the doctor, there is a disability of 74% to the limb and 24.6% to the whole body.

¶22

The Court below, considering the evidence on record and applying the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Master Mallikarjuna Vs.

¶23

Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd., and another¹ , has granted compensation of an amount of Rs.8,50,200/-.

¶24

Learned counsel appearing for the claimant submits that in the case of Master Mallikarjuna (supra),

¶25

1 AIR 2014 Supreme Court 736

¶26

4 - NC: 2023:KHC:46816 MFA No. 6400 of 2019

¶27

the claimant was 12 years old, whereas in this case the claimant is 15 years old. He submits that as per the doctor the claimant had sustained the disability of 24.6%. The Tribunal ought to have taken the notional income and ought to have applied the multiplier and granted the compensation. It is submitted that the ratio in the case of Master Mallikarjuna (supra), do not apply to the facts of the present case. It is submitted that the Tribunal has failed to take into consideration the loss of earning of the parents and further for the nourishment that the claimant was in hospital for a period of 135 days [4 1/2 months]. It is submitted that even for future medical expenses and all other heads, the Tribunal has granted meager compensation. Hence, he seeks for enhancement of compensation.

¶28

Learned counsel appearing for the insurance company submits that the Tribunal has rightly applied the ratio in the case of Master Mallikarjuna (supra). He submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is

¶29

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:46816 MFA No. 6400 of 2019

¶30

on the higher side. Learned counsel submits that the claimant is not entitled for compensation under other heads as per the judgment in the case of Master Mallikarjuna (supra). It is submitted that already for nourishment and attendant charges a sum of Rs.40,000/is granted and he submits that no grounds are made out for enhancement of compensation.

¶31

Having heard the learned counsel on either side perused the entire material on record. The claimant is 15 years old, the Tribunal had applied the ratio in the case of Master Mallikarjuna (supra). According to the learned counsel for the claimant, the notional income is to be taken and compensation has to be granted, this Court is not able to appreciate the said submission of the learned counsel for the claimant. According to the learned counsel for the insurance company, the other heads are not part of the Master Mallikarjuna's case (supra), hence, the claimant is not entitled for compensation under other heads. In Master Mallikarjuna's case (supra), the

¶32

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:46816 MFA No. 6400 of 2019

¶33

claimant was 12 years old, and in this case the claimant is 15 years old and studying in college, considering the same, as far as heads with regard to transportation, attendant charges, nourishment expenses and the loss of earning to the parents during laid up period is concerned, this Court is inclined to grant the compensation. Considering the hospitalization, towards nourishment expenses, attendant charges & transportation expenses , a sum of Rs.85,000/- is awarded. Towards the loss of earning to the parents during the laid up period is concerned, considering the hospitalization for a period of 4 1/2 months, this Court is granting compensation for a period of six months towards the loss of earning to the

¶34

parents an amount of Rs.57,000/- (Rs.9500 X 6).

¶35

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' .

¶36

2 (2014) 11 CC 178

¶37

¶38

NC: 2023:KHC:46816 MFA No. 6400 of 2019

¶39

8. In the light of the above discussion, the

¶40

claimant is therefore, entitled to the compensation under

¶41

the following heads:

¶42

Sl.No.	Heads	Compensation (Rs.)
1	Pain & Suffering	Rs.3,00,000
2	Medical Expenses	Rs.4,75,200
3	Future medical expenses	Rs.35,000
4	Nourishment expenses, attendant charges & transportation expenses	Rs.85,000
5	Loss of earning to parents during laid up period	Rs.57,000
6	Legal expenses	Rs.10,000
	Total	Rs.9,62,200

¶43

Accordingly, the following:

¶44

8 - NC: 2023:KHC:46816 MFA No. 6400 of 2019

¶45

ORDER

¶46

i) The Appeal is partly allowed enhancing the compensation amount from Rs.8,50,200/- to Rs.9,62,200/-.

¶47

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

¶48

iii) 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 amount shall

¶49

be disbursed in terms of the order of the Tribunal .

¶50

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.

¶51

v) No costs.

¶52

¶53

NC: 2023:KHC:46816 MFA No. 6400 of 2019

¶54

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall

¶55

stand closed.

¶56

SD/JUDGE

¶57

BSR List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4

Sri. Ravi v. Girish D S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Ravi v. Girish D S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Kalleshappa @ Kallesh Vs Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Ltd.

Jeson Saldanha Vs Arun D Souza

B R Sadananda Vs B M Chandra

Sri William Dayakar Vs M/S Devan Estate

Sannamma Vs Mallikarjun K

Sharadhamma Vs Pushpa Mangalamma