Partly allowed

Mohammad Adil S/O Abdul Basith v. Anil K.R.

Karnataka HC26 Sept 2024MFA/101460/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal partially, modifying the lower court's award in a motor vehicle accident case. The court enhanced total compensation to ₹10,25,363/ including future income, pain and suffering, and loss to parents based on minimum wage calculations and Supreme Court precedents for minors. The interest rate was reduced from 7% to 6% per annum.

What did the court decide?

Enhanced compensation awarded at ₹10,25,363/ with interest at 6% p.a.; interest rate on claim reduced from 7% to 6%; insurer directed to deposit within six weeks.

Mohammad Adil S/O Abdul Basith Vs Anil K.R. — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:14091 MFA No. 101460 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶4

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101460 OF 2018

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

MOHAMMAD ADIL S/O. ABDUL BASITH, AGE: 21 YEARS, OCC: STUDENT, NOW NIL R/O: HOSANAGAR, CHURCH ROAD, MOMIN MOHALL, TQ: HOSANAGAR, DIST: SHIVAMOGGA NOW AT C/O ZAHEER AHAMMED S/O. AKBAR BASHA UMACHAGI, R/O: VIJAYA NAGAR, HANGAL-581104, TQ: HANGAL, DIST: HAVERI.

¶7

…APPELLANT

¶8

(BY SRI. HARISH S. MAIGUR, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

BHARATHI H M

¶11

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

ANIL K.R. S/O. RANGEGOWA K., AGE: 23 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: # 49A, RAILWAY QUARTERS, CHAMEGOWDA AREA, OLD TOWN, BHADRAVATHI – 577301, TQ: BHADRAVATHI, DIST: SHIVAMOGGA.

¶13

THE BRANCH MANAGER, NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., 1^ST FLOOR, KRISHNA AGENCY BUILDING, P.B. ROAD, HAVERI - 581115.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(R1-SERVED; SRI. M. K. SOUDAGAR, 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.29/2015, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & AMACT, HANGAL, AT:HANGAL, DATED 04.12.2017 BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COSTS, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶17

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

¶18

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:14091 MFA No. 101460 of 2018

¶19

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶20

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶21

This appeal is filed by the claimant seeking enhancement of compensation awarded in the judgment dated 04.012.2017 passed in MVC No.29/2015 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge and AMACT, Hangal.

¶22

The brief facts of the claimant case are that, on 29.07.2014 at about 4:30 pm, the claimant was moving as a pillion rider along with his father on motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-15/S-6880 towards Fort in Hosanagar. When they reached near the house of Shantikere Nagarajagouda of Nagara Village at that time, respondent No.1 the rider of motorcycle bearing registration No.KA14/EF-4164 came from opposite side in a high speed, rash and negligent manner and dashed to the bike in which the claimant and his father were proceedings. Due to the accident, the claimant suffered fractures and multiple injuries all over the body. He took treatment in the

¶23

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:14091 MFA No. 101460 of 2018

¶24

Hospital. The claimant made a claim petition claiming

¶25

compensation.

¶26

The Tribunal after recording evidence and

¶27

appreciating the materials available on record has awarded

¶28

the compensation as under:

¶29

Towards pain and suffering already undergone and to be suffered in future, loss of amenities in life on account of permanent disability.	: Rs.	3,00,000-00
Discomfort, inconvenience and loss of earnings to the parents during the period of hospitalization.	: Rs.	20,000-00
Towards Medical and incidental expenses during the period of hospitalization	: Rs.	1,92,122-00
Towards diet, attendant, nourishing charges	: Rs.	20,000-00
Towards future medical expenses	: Rs.	20,000-00
Total	: Rs.	2,19,622-00

¶30

The claimant seeking enhancement of

¶31

compensation has filed this appeal.

¶32

Heard the learned counsel for appellant and

¶33

learned counsel for respondent No.2-insurance company.

¶34

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:14091 MFA No. 101460 of 2018

¶35

Learned counsel for appellant would contend

¶36

that the claimant-injured is aged 16 years as on the date of incident. He was studying in PUC-I and assisting his father in grocery business and earning more than ₹6,000/per month. He further submits that the injured has sustained seven fractures and the Doctor has assessed his disability at 50% and the Tribunal has taken the disability at 17%. He contends that considering the fractures sustained by the claimant, the disability taken by the Tribunal is on the lower side. He contends that the income of the claimant as he is 16 years of age, has to be calculated by taking the minimum wages for the relevant year and the claimant is also entitled to 40% of the future prospects. In view of the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Master Ayush Vs. Branch Manager, Reliance General Insurance Company Limited and

¶37

Another¹ .

¶38

1 (2022) ACCCIR 473 (SC)

¶39

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:14091 MFA No. 101460 of 2018

¶40

He contends that the compensation awarded for pain and suffering is proper. The Tribunal has not awarded towards loss of earning of the parents for the period of Hospitalization. He further contended that loss of earnings awarded by the Tribunal in a sum of ₹20,000/- is on the lower side. The Tribunal considering the bills has rightly awarded the medical and other incidental charges. The Doctor has stated that the claimant requires another ₹50,000/- for his future medical expenses. In spite of that the Tribunal has erred in awarding ₹20,000/- towards future medical expenses. On these grounds, he prays to allow the appeal and enhance the compensation.

¶41

Learned counsel for respondent No.2-insurance company would contend that the fracture sustained by the claimant does not cause any disability, at the most they can cause some inconvenience in biting as the said fractures are suffered on the face. The other fracture sustained is Patiala and no disability can be assessed for that. He contends that minimum wages cannot be taken

¶42

6 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:14091 MFA No. 101460 of 2018

¶43

into consideration as the same has to be taken into consideration for industrial purposes under Workmen Compensation Act. He contends that the compensation awarded for pain and suffering is on higher side. On these grounds he prays to dismiss the appeal.

¶44

Having heard the learned counsels, the Court

¶45

has perused the impugned judgment, award and other materials on record.

¶46

It is not in dispute that the injured was aged 16

¶47

years as on the date of incident and studying in PUC-I. The case of the claimant is that the injured was assisting his father in grocery business and earning ₹6,000/- per month. As per Ex.P.17-disability certificate, the claimant has sustained fracture of right orbital roof, fracture of the bilateral irbital wall, fracture of the bilateral maxilla, ethmoidal fracture, mandibular parasymphysis fracture, right temperal fracture and fracture of tibia wall which were treated surgically with plate and screws. The claimant has also sustained fracture of left parietal bone

¶48

7 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:14091 MFA No. 101460 of 2018

¶49

and the same has been treated conservatively. There is a stiffness in left knee joint. Considering the said aspects, the Doctor who has been examined as PW.2, has assessed the disability of the claimant at 50%. The Tribunal considering the said aspect has taken the disability at 17% which is 1/3^rd of the 50% as deposed by PW.2. The Tribunal has rightly taken the disability at 17%.

¶50

The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Master

¶51

Ayush (supra) has held as under;

¶52

“8. Hence, as per the above extract, the minimum wages payable to a skilled workman in 2010-11 is to the tune of Rs.3708.70. In this view, the minimum wages as on the date of accident is rounded off to Rs.3700/-. The compensation, therefore, is to be assessed on the basis of the said minimum wages on the assumption that the appellant would have been able to earn after attaining majority.

¶53

In addition to the skilled minimum wages, the appellant would be also entitled to 40% for future prospectus in view of the judgment of this Court in National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi & Ors; (2017) 16 SCC 680.”

¶54

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:14091 MFA No. 101460 of 2018

¶55

As per Master Ayush (Supra), the minor

¶56

injured is also entitled to loss of future earnings and it is to be calculated by taking minimum wages for the relevant year. In the case on hand, the accident occurred in the year 2014 and minimum wages for the said year is Rs.272.19/- per day. If the same is calculated for a month it come to ₹8,165/-. As per Master Ayush (Supra), the appellant-injured is also entitled to future prospectus at 40%. The multiplier applicable is 18. Therefore, the loss of future earning is (8,165 + 3,266 (40%) = 11,431 x 12 x 18 x 17%) ₹ 4,19,746/-.

¶57

Pain and suffering awarded by the Tribunal in a sum of ₹3,00,000/- is on the higher side considering the fractures sustained by the claimant. The claimant has sustained seven fractures and therefore he is entitled to pain and suffering in a sum of (25,000/- x 7) ₹1,75,000/-. The Tribunal has awarded medical and incidental expenses in a sum of ₹1,19,122/- based on the medical bills, it is

¶58

9 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:14091 MFA No. 101460 of 2018

¶59

proper and correct. The Tribunal has awarded loss of earnings to the parents in a sum of ₹20,000/-. The injured was admitted in Hospital for 19 days. Considering the said aspect, the parents are entitled for loss of earnings for a period of three months in a sum of (8,165 x 3) ₹24,495/-. Considering the injuries and evidence of the Doctor, the Tribunal has rightly awarded future medical expenses in a sum of ₹20,000/-. As the claimant is admitted in Hospital for 19 days, he is entitled to attendant charges, food, nourishment and conveyance charges of (1,000 x 19) ₹19,000/-. As the claimant has sustained seven fractures, he is entitled to loss of amenities in a sum of ₹1,75,000/-.

¶60

In view of the above, the claimant is entitled to compensation as under:

¶61

Medical expenses	: Rs. 1,92,122-00
Pain and sufferings	: Rs. 1,75,000-00
Loss of Future Amenities	: Rs. 1,75,000-00
Attendant, Food and Nourishment charges	: Rs. 19,000-00
Loss of Future Income	: Rs. 4,19,746-00
Loss of Income to parents	: Rs. 24,495-00
Total	: Rs. 10,25,363-00

¶62

10 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:14091 MFA No. 101460 of 2018

¶63

The appellant is entitled to total compensation

¶64

of ₹10,25,363/- as against ₹5,52,122/- as awarded by the Tribunal. The rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at 7% is on the higher side. In view of the decisions of this Court and Hon’ble Apex Court interest is to be awarded at 6% per annum.

¶65

In view of the above, the following:

¶66

ORDER

¶67

i) The appeal is allowed in part.

¶68

ii) The judgment and award dated 04.12.2017 passed in MVC No.29/2015 by the Court of Senior Civil Judge and AMACT, Hangal, is modified as under:

¶69

iii) The claimant-appellant is entitled to compensation in a sum of ₹10,25,363/with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

¶70

11 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:14091 MFA No. 101460 of 2018

¶71

iv) Respondent No.2-insurance company is directed to deposit the compensation amount with interest within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment, failing which, it is liable to pay interest at the rate of 9% per annum.

¶72

v) The claimant is entitled to release of entire amount of compensation.

¶73

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶74

PJ CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 53

Mohammad Adil S/O Abdul Basith v. Anil K.R.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Adil S/O Abdul Basith v. Anil K.R.

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 S Vs State of Karnataka by

United India Insurance Co., Ltd., Vs Sri Ganpathi W/O Chhayapa Kothawale

Smt. Bangarevva W/O Hanamanth Sausuddi, Vs Mr. Virupakshi S/O. Sattyappa Siddapur

The Divisional Manager Vs Latha W/O Yekanath Dange

The Divisional Controller Vs Veeranagouda

Shri. Veerangouda S/O Virupakshappa Kolur, Vs the Divisional Controller