Insurance company appealed challenging compensation amount awarded to accident victim. Court upheld Tribunal's award of Rs.4,29,000 citing severity of injuries and inability to examine treating physician due to COVID, dismissing the appeal.
Appeal dismissed; amount in deposit transmitted to Tribunal concerned.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:13368 MFA No. 101995 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2024 BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 101995 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, BY ITS BRANCH OFFICE OPP. FOREST OFFICE, BUS STAND ROAD, GOKAK - 591307. (INSURANCE OF MOTOR CYCLE NO.KA-24/L-1306) (POLICY NO.39010231186202054575) (VALID FROM 18.10.2018 TO 17.10.2019) REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY.
…APPELLANT
(BY SRI. G. N. RAICHUR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HARISH S. MAIGUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI. SANTHOSH B. MALAGOUDAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS MFA FILED U/S.173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYS TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS AND HEAR THE PARTIES AND MODIFY THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 01.02.2022 PASSED BY THE COURT OF XII ADDITIONAL DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE AND M.A.C.T., BELAGAVI SITTING AT GOKAK IN MVC NO.491/2019 BY REDUCING THE COMPENSATION AWARDED BY THE HON’BLE
TRIBUNAL BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COST IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal is filed by the insurance company challenging the quantum of compensation awarded in judgment dated 01.02.2022 in MVC No.419/2019 by the learned XII Additional District and Sessions Judge and MACT, Belagavi, sitting at Gokak.
wrist. The claimant, initially, was taken to the Civil Hospital at MK Hubballi and further she was referred to Vijaya Ortho Prima Centre, Belagavi. The claimant made a petition seeking compensation.
compensation as under:
| Sl. No. |
Heads | Amount in Rs. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pain and suffering | 25,000/- |
| 2 | Medical expenses | 86420/- |
| 3 | Future medical expenses | 50,000/- |
| 4 | Loss of income during laid up period | 45,000/- |
| 5 | Food and nourishment charges | 20,000/- |
| 6 | Loss of amenities | 2,00,000/- |
| 7 | Conveyance charges | 2,000/- |
| TOTAL | 4,28,420/- | |
| Rounded to | 4,29,000/- |
No.1/claimant.
loss of amenities and also future medical expenses in a sum of Rs.50,000/-. He contends that the claimant could not examine the Doctor, due to COVID prevailing at that time. The claimant was a coolie and illiterate and the Tribunal taking into consideration the same and appreciating the evidence of PW.1 and documents produced, has rightly awarded the compensation. With this, he prayed to dismiss the appeal.
has perused the impugned judgment and award and other material placed on record
claimant at Rs.15,000/- per month. Ex.P-7 is the wound certificate wherein the injuries sustained by
the claimant are noted are as under:
It is opined that injury Nos.1 and 2 are grievous in nature and need further evaluation at higher centre and injury No.3 is simple in nature. In Ex.P-8-wound certificate issued by the Vijaya Ortho and Trauma Centre, Belgaum, the injuries noted are:
1.Right side ear bleeding
CT brain with facial etn with C. spine screen; signs of neuro parenchymal injury present. Fracture of skull bone seen. CT ofmaxillo-facial bones. Indicate of fracture of sphemoid and ethmoid bones.
It is noted in Ex.P-8 that injury No.1 is grievous
in nature and injury No.2 is simple in nature.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:13368 MFA No. 101995 of 2022
the Vijaya Ortho and Trauma Centre, Belgaum,
wherein diagnosis made is as under:
and the treatment given as per Ex.P-12 is
Ex.P-12 shows that discharge of the claimant is on request and follow up treatment was till 90th day. It further discloses that the patient relative refused for craniotomy and opted for conservative treatment. The said craniotomy was suggested by the Doctor. The very said craniotomy indicate that the injury is serious in nature. The craniotomy indicate removing part of skull to access brain and the said injury would affect the sound mind of a person and would impact routine functions, social
behavior, impairing functions like speech etc. The Tribunal has noted that, due to COVID pandemic, the claimant could not examine the Doctor, who treated her. Considering the said aspect, the Tribunal has rightly awarded compensation of Rs.2,00,000/towards loss of amenities and Rs.25,000/- towards pain and suffering. The Tribunal considering the amount spent towards treatment, has rightly awarded a sum of Rs.86,000/- towards medical expenses. The Tribunal has awarded future medical expenses of Rs.50,000/-. The Tribunal has taken into consideration that Ex.P-12-discharge summary indicate that the clamant has been discharged on her request and she has not opted for craniotomy and opted for conservative treatment. The said aspect reflects inability of the claimant to afford for proper and further treatment. In the said Ex.P-12, the clamant has been advised for follow up treatment up to 90 days. Considering the said
aspect, the Tribunal has rightly awarded a sum of Rs.50,000/- towards future medical expenses.
compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper. There are no grounds to interfere with the well reasoned judgment passed by the Tribunal.
ORDER
The appeal is dismissed.
NC: 2024:KHC-D:13368 MFA No. 101995 of 2022
Registry is directed to transmit the amount in deposit to the Tribunal concerned.
Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE
Kmv CT:ANB
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal for loss of amenities, future medical expenses, and pain and suffering is unsustainable due to lack of medical examination.
Whether the loss of income during the laid up period and other heads of compensation were rightly awarded considering the nature of injuries and circumstance of the trial.
Whether the appeal filed by the insurance company challenging the adequacy of compensation should be allowed or dismissed.
NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED
SMT. SHAINAZ W/O. SALIM SHAIKH
YALLAPPA NINGAPPA DAVALESHI
SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
