Partly allowed

Sri. Prasad Shivaji Naik v. Mrs. Sugandha Yallappa Patil

Karnataka HC19 Sept 2024MFA/100815/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Claimant-painter injured in a car accident sought enhancement of MACT compensation. Court raised disability to whole body from 10% to 20%, enhanced pain and suffering, added loss of amenities and three months' laid-up income, enhancing compensation to Rs.6,64,352 with 6% interest.

What did the court decide?

Total compensation enhanced to Rs.6,64,352/- with 6% interest; insurer to deposit within six weeks failing which 9% interest; entire amount releasable to claimant.

Sri. Prasad Shivaji Naik Vs Mrs. Sugandha Yallappa… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13383 MFA No. 100815 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶4

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 100815 OF 2018

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

SRI. PRASAD SHIVAJI NAIK, AGE:21 YEARS, OCC: PAINTER, NOW NIL, R/O: A/P SULAGA(U)-591108, TQ:DIST:BELAGAVI.

¶7

…APPELLANT

¶8

(BY SRI. HARISH S. MAIGUR, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

MRS. SUGANDHA YALLAPPA PATIL, AGE: MAJOR, OCC:TEACHER, R/O H.NO-402/1, VENGURLA ROAD, SULAGA(U), BELAGAVI-591108.

¶11

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER, ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD., HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 45-46, SUNDARAM TOWERS, WHITES ROAD, CHENNAI-600014, TAMIL NADU.

¶12

BHARATHI H M

¶13

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(R1-SERVED; BY SRI. S.K.KAYAKAMATH, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶16

THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYS TO ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION BY MODIFYING THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD PASSED IN MVC NO.329/2017, ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDITIONAL MACT., BELAGAVI, DATED 01.01.2018 BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COST, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶17

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

¶18

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶19

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13383 MFA No. 100815 of 2018

¶20

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶21

This appeal is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded in the judgment and award dated 01.01.2018 passed by the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Belagavi in MVC No.329/2017.

¶22

Facts of the claimant’s case are that, on 12.03.2016, the claimant was proceeding in car bearing registration No.KA.22.Z.9377 from Gadahinglaj to his native, at 1:35pm, accident occurred due to driver driving the vehicle in a rash and negligent manner and losing control and dashing to the road side Nilagiri tree. The claimant was shifted to Vijay Hospital and thereafter to Kale Orthopedic Centre, Belagavi and treated as an indoor patient from 12.03.2016 to 17.03.2016. The clamant was aged 20 years and was a painter. The claimant made a claim petition seeking compensation. The Tribunal after recording evidence

¶23

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13383 MFA No. 100815 of 2018

¶24

and appreciating the evidence on record, has

¶25

awarded the compensation as under:

¶26

HEADS	A	MOUNT
Towards lost earning capacity.	Rs.	2,37,600/-
Towards medical expenses.	Rs.	81,152/-
Towards pain and suffering	Rs.	10,000/-
Towards nutritious food, diet conveyance, attendance charges and for laid of period	Rs.	15,000/-
Towards laid of period	Rs.	2,500/-
TOTAL	Rs.	3,46,252/-

¶27

The claimant seeking enhancement of the said compensation has filed this appeal.

¶28

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant

¶29

and the learned counsel for respondent No.2.

¶30

Learned counsel for the appellant would contend that, the Doctor who has been examined as PW.2 is the treated doctor and has deposed that the injured-claimant has sustained 30% disability to the right upper limb and the Tribunal has erred in taking the disability of the whole body at 10%. He contends

¶31

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13383 MFA No. 100815 of 2018

¶32

that the claimant is a painter and as the fracture is on the right side and due to fixing of intra medullar nail, has affected his functioning as a painter and he is not able to lift heavyweight and it has reduced the strength of his right hand. He further contends that the Tribunal has awarded loss of income during laid up period at R.2,500/-. The claimant was admitted in the hospital for six days. Considering the said aspect, the Tribunal ought to have awarded 3 months income as loss of income during laid up period as he could not do the work of painting for that period. The Tribunal has not awarded loss of amenities and compensation awarded for pain and suffering is on the lower side. With this, he prayed to allow the appeal.

¶33

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would contend that the Tribunal has rightly taken the disability at 10% considering the evidence of PW.2the Doctor and the fractures sustained by the claimant. He contends that the Tribunal has rightly

¶34

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13383 MFA No. 100815 of 2018

¶35

awarded the compensation and the compensation awarded is just and proper. With this, he prayed to dismiss the appeal.

¶36

Having heard the learned counsel, the Court has perused the impugned judgment and the trial Court records.

¶37

The claimant is aged 20 years and he was a painter. The Tribunal has taken the income of the claimant at Rs.11,000/- per month. Considering Ex.P-9-disability certificate, there is lower 3^rd humerus fracture with hair line crack middle 3^rd right. Ex.P-6 is the discharge summary and Ex.P-5 is the wound certificate. PW.2-Doctor, who has issued disability certificate has stated that there is 30% disability to the upper limb. The Tribunal has taken the disability to the whole body at 10%. The Tribunal has not taken into consideration that the claimant is a painter and as there is a fracture to his right hand, it affects his functioning as a painter.

¶38

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13383 MFA No. 100815 of 2018

¶39

The Dctor in his cross-examination has sated that there is reduction of strength of right hand. Even though the Doctor has stated 30% disability is physical and not functional but considering the avocation of the claimant that he is a painter and as the fracture is to the right hand, has affected his functioning as a painter. Considering the said aspect, the Tribunal ought to have taken the disability at 20%. In view of the above, loss of earning is Rs.4,75,200/- (Rs.11,000/-x12x18x20%). The Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/- towards pain and suffering and has not awarded any amount towards loss of amenities. Considering the fracture, the claimant is entitled to Rs.30,000/- towards pain and suffering and Rs.30,000/- towards loss of amenities. The claimant was admitted to the hospital for six days and therefore, due to fracture, he could not perform his work as a painter. Therefore, he is entitled for loss of income during laid up period in a sum of Rs.11,000/- for 3 months

¶40

7 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13383 MFA No. 100815 of 2018

¶41

i.e. Rs.33,000/-. The Tribunal has rightly awarded medical expenses of Rs.81,152/- and Rs.15,000/towards food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges.

¶42

In view of the above, the claimant is

¶43

entitled to compensation as under:

¶44

Sl.	HEADS	Amount in Rs.
No.
1	Towards loss of earning capacity	4,75,200/-
2	Medical expenses	81,152/-
3	Pain and suffering	30,000/-
4	Loss of amenities	30,000/-
5	Food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges	15,000/-
6	Loss of income during laid up period.	33,000/-
	TOTAL	6,64,352/-

¶45

The clamant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.6,64,352/as against

¶46

Rs.3,46,252 awarded by the Tribunal.

¶47

In view of the above, the following

¶48

ORDER

¶49

The Appeal is allowed in part. The judgment

¶50

and award dated 01.01.2018 passed by the learned I Additional Senior Civil Judge and Additional MACT, Belagavi in MVC No.329/2017, is modified. The

¶51

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:13383 MFA No. 100815 of 2018

¶52

appellant-claimant is entitled to total compensation of Rs.6,64,352/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization.

¶53

Respondent No.2 insurance company shall deposit the compensation amount within six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment, failing which, it is liable to pay interest @ 9% per annum.

¶54

On deposit, the claimant is entitled to release of entire compensation amount.

¶55

Draw the award accordingly.

¶56

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶57

Kmv

¶58

CT:ANB

Sri. Prasad Shivaji Naik v. Mrs. Sugandha Yallappa Patil

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri. Prasad Shivaji Naik v. Mrs. Sugandha Yallappa Patil

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

Chandan K @ Chandan Gowda Vs State of Karnataka

Mohammed Irfan K S S/O K S Abdul Samad Vs the State of Karnataka

The Divisional Controller Nwkrtc Vs Shri.Irangouda Basanagouda Patil

National Insurance Company Limited Vs Smt. Shainaz W/O Salim Shaikh

Sri Jinnapa S/O Shivappa Jamkhandi Vs Sri Mayappa S/O Nagappa Pujari

The National Insurance Co.Ltd., Vs Shri.Kallappa S/O. Rachappa Kamate