Partly allowed

Jeson Saldanha v. Arun D Souza

Karnataka HC20 Dec 2023MFA/9033/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a first appeal filed by an injured claimant seeking enhancement of motor accident compensation. The Court increased the award from Rs.3,15,066 to Rs.4,04,386 by adjusting amounts for pain and suffering, loss of future amenities, and attendant expenses, citing the Supreme Court guidelines in V.Mekala.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced from Rs.3,15,066 to Rs.4,04,386; interest at 6% p.a. awarded; deposit directed within eight weeks.

Jeson Saldanha Vs Arun D Souza — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

1 - NC: 2023:KHC:46835 MFA No. 9033 of 2017

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 9033 OF 2017 (MV-I)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

JESON SALDANHA,

¶8

S/O. LATE PAUSTHINE SALDANA, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/AT HALASINAKATTE POST, PILAR VILLAGE, UDUPI TALUK, UDUPI DISTRICT - 576 101.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. GANESHA R, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

ARUN D'SOUZA, S/O ALEX @ LAJARES D'SOUZA, MAJOR, R/AT OLD CHURCH COMPOUND,

¶13

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

¶14

SHIRVA VILLAGE,

¶15

UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT - 576 101.

¶16

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., JEWEL PLAZA, 1ST FLOOR, MARUTHI VEETHIKA, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT - 576 101.

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI. JANARDHANA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2; R1 - SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 18.04.2017 PASSED IN MVC

¶20

¶21

NC: 2023:KHC:46835 MFA No. 9033 of 2017

¶22

NO.874/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, UDUPI, ADDITIONAL MACT, UDUPI, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶23

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

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

Aggrieved by the award passed in

¶26

M.V.C.No.874/2015 dated 18.04.2017 by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and Prl. Senior Civil Judge

¶27

at Udupi, the claimant is before this Court seeking enhancement of the compensation. The claim petition was filed seeking compensation of an amount of Rs.17,25,000/- for the injuries sustained by the claimant in the accident.

¶28

The case of the claimant is that due to the accident, the claimant had sustained open fracture of left tibia and fibula with left heel soft tissue injury and according to the doctor, these injuries are grievous in nature. According to the claimant, he had undergone

¶29

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:46835 MFA No. 9033 of 2017

¶30

treatment for wound debridement, external fixator for tibia was done and he spent huge amounts towards treatment.

¶31

According to the doctor, the claimant had sustained 8% disability. It is the case of the claimant that he was working as an Operator in Sree Ganesh Hollow Block Factory at Mudarangadi, Udupi and was earning an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month. The Court below had taken the income at Rs.8,000/- and the disability as 8% and granted compensation as per the table below:

¶32

	Heads	C	ompensation Awarded
1.	Pain and Sufferings	Rs.	40,000/-
2.	Medical expenses	Rs.	85,506/-
3.	Loss of income during the laid up period	Rs.	16,000/-
4.	Loss of future earning capacity	Rs.	1,30,560/-
5.	Future medical expenses	Rs.	25,000/-
6.	Attendant expenses, conveyance and nourishment	Rs.	3,000/-
7.	Future unhappiness, loss of amenities, marriage prospects, shortening of life span	Rs.	15,000/-
	Total	Rs.	3,15,066/-

¶33

¶34

NC: 2023:KHC:46835 MFA No. 9033 of 2017

¶35

Learned counsel appearing for the claimant submits that when the claimant had sustained two grievous injuries, the Court below had granted meager amount of Rs.40,000/- under the head of pain and suffering. It is submitted that the income of the claimant was taken at Rs.8,000/- per month which is on the lower side. It is further submitted that as he was there in the hospital for 17 days, the Court below under the head of attendant expenses, conveyance and nourishment had only granted an amount of Rs.3,000/-. Even towards loss of amenities also, only an amount of Rs.15,000/- was granted which is on the lower side.

¶36

Learned counsel appearing for the Insurance

¶37

Company submits that the Court below based on the evidence had rightly granted compensation and no grounds are made out seeking enhancement of the compensation.

¶38

5 - NC: 2023:KHC:46835 MFA No. 9033 of 2017

¶39

Having heard the learned counsel on either side,

¶40

perused the entire material on record. In this case, the claimant had sustained two grievous injuries and the Court below had granted an amount of Rs.40,000/- under the head of pain and suffering. This Court is granting an amount of Rs.60,000/- towards pain and suffering . Then towards medical expenses, the Court below had rightly granted the compensation and no grounds are made out seeking enhancement of the compensation. Then coming to the head of loss of income during the laid

¶41

up period, the Court below had taken an amount of Rs.8,000/- as the income. As this is an accident of the year 2015, this Court is taking an amount of Rs.9,000/- as the income, then for three months Rs.9,000x3 = Rs.27,000/- is granted towards loss of income during

¶42

the laid up period . Then coming to the head of loss of future income, considering the income at Rs.9,000/- and the disability at 8%, this Court is granting Rs.9,000x12x17x8/100 = Rs.1,46,880/- towards loss of future income . Towards future medical expenses, the

¶43

6 - NC: 2023:KHC:46835 MFA No. 9033 of 2017

¶44

Court below had rightly granted an amount of Rs.25,000/and no grounds are made out seeking enhancement of the compensation. Towards attendant expenses, conveyance and nourishment, the Court below had granted only an amount of Rs.3,000/-. Considering 17 days hospitalization, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.20,000/- towards attendant expenses, conveyance and nourishment . Then coming to the loss of future amenities, considering the age of 28 years, the Court below had granted an amount of Rs.15,000/towards future unhappiness, loss of amenities, marriage prospectus and shortening of life span which is on the lower side. Considering the disability, this Court is granting an amount of Rs.30,000/- under the head of

¶45

future amenities .

¶46

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

¶47

7 - NC: 2023:KHC:46835 MFA No. 9033 of 2017

¶48

MALATHI AND ANOTHER¹ , the claimant is entitled for an

¶49

amount of Rs.10,000/- towards legal expenses .

¶50

Altogether, the claimant is entitled for compensation of an

¶51

amount of Rs.4,04,386/- .

¶52

The claimant is therefore, entitled to the

¶53

compensation under the following heads:

¶54

	Heads		C	ompensation Awarded
1.	Pain and Sufferings	:	Rs.	60,000/-
2.	Loss of future income	:	Rs.	1,46,880/-
3.	Medical expenses	:	Rs.	85,506/-
4.	Loss of income during the laid up period	:	Rs.	27,000/-
5.	Future medical expenses	:	Rs.	25,000/-
6.	Attendant expenses, conveyance and nourishment	:	Rs.	20,000/-
7.	Loss of future amenities	:	Rs.	30,000/-
7.	Legal Expenses	:	Rs.	10,000/-
	TOTAL	:	Rs.	4,04,386/-

¶55

1 (2014) 11 SCC 178

¶56

8 - NC: 2023:KHC:46835 MFA No. 9033 of 2017

¶57

Accordingly, the appeal of the claimant is allowed-in-part enhancing the compensation from an amount of Rs.3,15,066/- to Rs.4,04,386/- setting aside the award passed in M.V.C.No.874/2015 dated 18.04.2017.

¶58

i. The enhanced amount shall carry interest at 6% p.a. from the date of petition till the date of realization. The claimant will not be entitled for any interest for the delayed period.

¶59

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.

¶60

iii. Registry is directed to return the Trial Court Records to the Tribunal, along with certified

¶61

¶62

NC: 2023:KHC:46835 MFA No. 9033 of 2017

¶63

copy of the order passed by this Court forthwith

¶64

without any delay.

¶65

iv. No costs.

¶66

Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶67

Sd/ JUDGE

¶68

MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 2 CT: BHK

Jeson Saldanha v. Arun D Souza

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jeson Saldanha v. Arun D Souza

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

Dinesh N Vs Sri. Nanda Kumar v

Chandrashekar Vs Smt Indramma

Chinnappaiah @ Chikkappaiah Vs Ramesh

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

B R Sadananda Vs B M Chandra

Sri. Shivakumar Vs the Divisional Manager