Partly allowed

Mr a Ramanath v. Smt Prema N

Karnataka HC27 Jul 2023MFA/7427/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a first appeal under the Motor Vehicles Act, the High Court enhanced compensation awarded to an injured motorcycle rider for an accident, increasing the total sum based on the nature and duration of injuries, while affirming the medical expenses component.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed in part; compensation enhanced by Rs. 29,000 plus RS. 6% per annum interest from the date of petition to realization.

Mr a Ramanath Vs Smt Prema N — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:26208 MFA No. 7427 of 2017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 27^TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C M JOSHI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 7427 OF 2017 (MV-I)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

MR. A. RAMANATH S/O. LATE. A. RANGA, AGED ABOUT 37 YEARS, R/AT DOOR NO 24-8-827, SEETHARAMA COMPOUND, BABUGUDDE, ATTAVARA POST, MANGALURU TALUK, D.K. DISTRICT. PIN - 575 003.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI: G. RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Digitally signed by T S NAGARATHNA Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶13

SMT. PREMA N W/O. B.S. SIDDALINGA MURTHY, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, R/AT NO 822, 3^RD MAIN, COD POLICE QUARTERS, KENGERI SATTELI CHUNDENAPURA, BENGALURU - 560 060.

¶14

RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., BRANCH OFFICE AT NO 782, BALAJI ENCLAVE, 16^TH MAIN, BTM LAYOUT, 2^ND STAGE, BENGALURU REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER PIN - 570 076.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS

¶16

(BY SRI: MALLIKARJUN REDDY N.A., ADVOCATES FOR SRI: H.S. LINGARAJ, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶17

- 2 - NC: 2023:KHC:26208 MFA No. 7427 of 2017

¶18

THIS M.F.A. IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 23.01.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.613/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE MEMBER, MACT & 2^ND ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MANGALURU, D.K., PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶19

THIS M.F.A., COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

With consent of learned counsel appearing for both the parties, matter is taken up for final disposal, even though it is listed for Admission.

¶22

Heard learned counsel for the appellant/petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent No.2/Insurance Company.

¶23

Parties shall be referred to as per their ranking before the Tribunal.

¶24

This appeal arises out of the judgment and award in MVC No.613/2015, dated 23.01.2017, passed by the learned II Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Mangaluru, Dakshina Kannada (henceforth referred to as 'the Tribunal' for short), whereby the appellant herein was awarded a sum of Rs.72,200/- as compensation.

¶25

NC: 2023:KHC:26208 MFA No. 7427 of 2017

¶26

¶27

The appellant/petitioner contended that in the road traffic accident occurred on 01.11.2014, he had sustained lacerated wound, measuring 8X2 cm over front aspect of right knee, contusion measuring 5X5 cm over right hip and abrasion measuring 3X3 cm over outer aspect of right elbow. The petitioner had approached the Tribunal seeking just and reasonable compensation. It was contended that the petitioner was a pillion rider of the motorcycle bearing registration No.KA19-Y-0202 and the said vehicle was met with an accident with Qualis bearing registration No.KA-05-C-2488. The police have investigated the matter and ultimately filed charge sheet against the driver of the Qualis. As such, liability was fastened on the insurer of the Quails vehicle. After appreciating the available records, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.72,200/- as compensation.

¶28

On issuance of notice, respondents No.2 alone contested the petition by filing written statement.

¶29

Respondent No.2- Insurance Company denied all

¶30

the contentions taken by the petitioner and also the age, income and avocation claimed by the petitioner and contended

¶31

¶32

NC: 2023:KHC:26208 MFA No. 7427 of 2017

¶33

that the petitioner had not suffered any permanent disability in the accident. It has contended that the compensation claimed by the petitioner is highly excessive, exorbitant and untenable

¶34

in law. Therefore, prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

¶35

On the basis of the above pleadings, the Tribunal framed necessary issues and the petitioner was examined as PW-1 and documents were marked as Exs.P4, P5 and P9 to 12. Respondents have not led any evidence, but copy of insurance policy is marked as Ex.R1.

¶36

The Tribunal, after hearing both the sides, awarded the compensation under different heads as below;

¶37

Pain and Sufferings	Rs.15,000.00
Conveyance, Food &	Rs.6,000.00
Attendant
Loss of income during laid	Rs. 4,000.00
offperiod
Medical Expenses	Rs.47,200.00
Total	Rs.72,200.00

¶38

Being aggrieved by the said judgment and award, the petitioner is before this Court in the present appeal.

¶39

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:26208 MFA No. 7427 of 2017

¶40

On issuance of notice, respondent No.2 has

¶41

appeared before this Court and notice to respondent No.1 was dispensed with at the risk of the appellant.

¶42

Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side and the Tribunal has failed to taken into consideration nature of the injuries sustained by the appellant and the period of inpatient treatment. It is submitted that the Tribunal should have awarded higher compensation in respect of loss of income during the laid up period, conveyance, food and attendant charges etc. Therefore, learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and prays for allowing the appeal.

¶43

On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.2-Insurance Company has contended that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and there is no need for reconsideration of the amount awarded by the Tribunal. Learned counsel further submits that adequate compensation has already been awarded by the Tribunal and that all injuries

¶44

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:26208 MFA No. 7427 of 2017

¶45

are simple in nature and therefore, no enhancement is permissible.

¶46

On careful consideration of rival contentions of the parties and on perusal of the impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal, it appears that the petitioner was in-patient for a period of ten days. As such, he was unable to resume his work at least for a period of two months. The nature of the injuries suffered by the petitioner clearly suggest that he being a person involved in fixing of tiles to the flooring involving in manual labour, he has been incapacitated for a period of two months to resume his work.

¶47

Learned counsel for the appellant has also drawn attention of this Court to the fact that the petitioner had sustained lacerated wound over front aspect of right knee, contusion over right hip and abrasion over outer aspect of right elbow. Therefore, compensation under the heads 'Pain and Sufferings', 'Conveyance, Food & Attendant' and 'Loss of Income during laid off period' needs to be enhanced.

¶48

Considering the above submission and having noted the nature of the injuries suffered by petitioner, this Court is of

¶49

7 - NC: 2023:KHC:26208 MFA No. 7427 of 2017

¶50

the considered opinion that the petitioner is to be awarded a

¶51

sum of Rs.25,000/- under the head 'Pain and Sufferings'

¶52

and a sum of Rs.12,000/- under the head of 'Conveyance,

¶53

Food & Attendant ' and a sum of Rs.17,000/- under the head

¶54

' Loss of income during laid up period'.

¶55

Therefore, the petitioner is entitled for additional compensation of Rs.29,000/-

¶56

The compensation awarded by the Tribunal under

¶57

the head of 'medical expenses' being Rs.47,200/- is just and proper. Hence, the same needs no enhancement.

¶58

Accordingly, the petitioner is entitled for total compensation of Rs.1,01,200/- under the following heads:

¶59

SL. NO.	PARTICULARS	AMOUNT (IN RS.)
1	Pain and Sufferings	25,000.00
2	Conveyance,Food & Attendant	12,000.00
3	Loss of income during laid off period	17,000.00
4	Medical Expenses	47,200.00
	TOTAL Less awarded by Tribunal	1,01,200.00 72,200.00
	Enhancement	29,000.00

¶60

¶61

NC: 2023:KHC:26208 MFA No. 7427 of 2017

¶62

Thus, the petitioner is entitled for enhanced

¶63

compensation of Rs.29,000/- with interest and therefore, the appeal deserves to be allowed in part. Hence, the following:

¶64

ORDER

¶65

(i) The appeal is allowed in part.

¶66

(ii) The impugned judgment and award passed by the Tribunal is modified by awarding a sum of Rs.29,000/- in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal together with interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till its realization.

¶67

(iii) Respondent No.2- Insurance company is directed to deposit the entire compensation amount within a period of six weeks from the date of this order.

¶68

(v) Rest of the order of the Tribunal stands unaltered.

¶69

Sd/JUDGE

¶70

Mr a Ramanath v. Smt Prema N

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr a Ramanath v. Smt Prema N

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

H S Veerabhadraiah Vs Hanumanthappa

Jayanna B B Vs Mukthar Pasha

The Legal Manager Vs Chikkamuniswamy

Rahul a Vs Harshith a S

The Managing Director Vs Darshan S

Smt Rajeshwari M Vs Mr a Zakeer Hussain