Partly allowed

Sadashiv S/O Allappa Matagar v. Tippanna S/O Fakirappa Dhavaleshwar

Karnataka HC10 Apr 2024MFA/101168/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Injured claimant appealed for enhancement of motor accident compensation. Court reassessed notional income at Rs.11,750 per month using the KSLSA chart, multiplier 15 and 15% disability, and enhanced compensation from Rs.4,38,273 to Rs.5,73,975 with 6% interest, allowing the appeal in part.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced total compensation of Rs.5,73,975/- with interest at 6% p.a.; insurer to deposit within six weeks and amount released to claimant.

Sadashiv S/O Allappa Matagar Vs Tippanna S/O… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6313

¶2

MFA No. 101168 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101168 OF 2022 (MV-I)

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SADASHIV S/O ALLAPPA MATAGAR AGE. 48 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE COOLIE (NOW NILL) R/O. SHANTI NAGAR, MUDHOL TQ. MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT-587313

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. G R TURAMARI, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

TIPPANNA S/O FAKIRAPPA DHAVALESHWAR AGE. 53 YEARS, OCC. OWNER OF TRACTOR (ENGINE) R/O. SHIROL VILLAGE, MUDHOL TQ. MUDHOL, DIST. BAGALKOT-587313

¶13

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., SANGAM BUILDING,SIDDESAWAR FRONT ROAD, VIJAYAPUR, TQ AND DIST. VIJAYAPUR-580010

¶14

Digitally signed by JAGADISH T R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

(BY SMT. PREETI SHASHANK, ADVOCATE FOR R2) (R1-NOTICE DISPENSED WITH)

¶16

…RESPONDENTS

¶17

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 12.06.2020 PASSED IN MVC NO.118/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL-XIV, MUDHOL, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶18

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

¶19

¶20

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6313 MFA No. 101168 of 2022

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

¶23

2. This appeal is by the injured/claimants seeking enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by judgment and award dated 12.06.2020 passed in MVC No.118/2019 by the Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal XIV, Mudhol (for short, ‘Tribunal’).

¶24

3. Heard the learned counsel Sri.G.R.Turamari for the appellant/claimant and learned counsel Smt.Preeti Shashank, for respondent No.2.

¶25

4. Learned counsel for the appellant seeks to reassess

¶26

the income of the injured notionally and seeks to enhance the compensation under the heads of pain and sufferings, loss of amenities, loss of income during treatment period and attendant charges. Thus, he prays to allow the appeal.

¶27

5. Per contra, Smt.Preeti Shashank, learned counsel

¶28

for the respondent/Insurance Company supports the impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal and seeks dismissal of the appeal.

¶29

¶30

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6313 MFA No. 101168 of 2022

¶31

6. It is not in dispute that the appellant met with accident on 27.11.2018 and sustained grievous injuries. Admittedly, appellant has not placed any evidence with regard to the income. This Court re-assesses the income of the appellant at Rs.11,750/- per month placing reliance on the notional income chart prepared by the KSLSA. There is no dispute with regard to age of the appellant as 40 years, proper multiplier would be 15 and disability of the appellant is assessed at 15%. Thus, loss of future income due to disability is recomputed as under:

¶32

11,750 x 12 x 15 x 15%= Rs.3,17,250/-

¶33

7. The appellant would be entitled to Rs.40,000/- under the head of pain and sufferings and Rs.30,000/- under the head of loss of amenities. The Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,800/- under the head of attendant charges, food, nourishment and conveyance charges which is to be reassessed at Rs.15,000/-. Under the head of loss of income during the period of treatment and rest, the claimant would be entitled to Rs.35,250/-(11750x3) . The Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,36,475/- towards medical expenses as per medical bills,

¶34

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6313 MFA No. 101168 of 2022

¶35

which is unaltered. Thus, in all, the claimant shall be entitled to

¶36

HEADS	AMOUNT (in Rs.)
Towards pain and suffering	40,000/-
Towards Medical expenses	1,36,475/-
Loss of income during the period of treatment and rest	35,250/-
Towards attendant charges, food, nourishment and conveyance charges	15,000/-
Loss of amenities	30,000/-
Loss of future income	3,17,250/-
Total	5,73,975/-

¶37

modified compensation under the following heads:

¶38

8. Thus, the claimant shall be entitled to total compensation of Rs.5,73,975/- as against Rs.4,38,273/awarded by the learned Tribunal.

¶39

9. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the

¶40

following:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

a) Appeal stands allowed in part .

¶43

b) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the claimant would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.5,73,975/- as against Rs.4,38,273/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶44

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6313 MFA No. 101168 of 2022

¶45

c) The enhanced compensation amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment.

¶46

d) The Insurance Company shall deposit the enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from today.

¶47

e) On such deposit, the same shall be released in favour of the appellant/claimant.

¶48

f) Registry to transmit the records forthwith to the Tribunal.

¶49

g) Draw modified award accordingly.

¶50

Sd/JUDGE

¶51

RKM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 40

Sadashiv S/O Allappa Matagar v. Tippanna S/O Fakirappa Dhavaleshwar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadashiv S/O Allappa Matagar v. Tippanna S/O Fakirappa Dhavaleshwar

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

Goudappa S/O Kallappa Sunkad Vs Fakirappa S/O Mahadevappa Hulagur

Prashant S/O.Maruti Vernekar Vs the Managing Director

Babu S/O Ganapati Sheth Vs the Managing Director

Yamanappa S/O Hanamappa Hanamant Channadasar Vs Sri. Bhaskar Puttayya Acharya

Smt. Manjula W/O Naveen Chinnadkai Vs Shri. Naveen S/O Gangadhar Chinnadkai

Smt Sridevi W/O Basayya Hiremath Vs Sri Basayya S/O Veerabhadrayya Hiremath