Partly allowed

Sri M v. Venkataramegowda v Sri K P Umar

Karnataka HC24 Sept 2024MFA/1862/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Claimant sought enhancement of compensation for injuries suffered in a motor vehicle accident; the Tribunal had awarded Rs.57,420. The High Court allowed the appeal in part, enhancing total compensation to Rs.132,420 with interest at 6% p.a., excluding interest for the 1607-day delay in filing the appeal.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced to Rs.132,420 with 6% p.a. interest; insurer to deposit within six weeks; no interest on enhancement for 1607 days' delay.

Sri M v Venkataramegowda Vs Sri K P Umar — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:39524 MFA No. 1862 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 24^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 1862 OF 2018 (MV)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI M V VENKATARAMEGOWDA S/O VENKATEGOWDA AGED ABOUT 61 YEARS

¶8

RESIDING AT MARADAHALLY VILLAGE SEELANERE HOBLI, K.R.PET TALUK-571426.

¶9

…APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. K R LINGARAJU.,ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND:

¶12

SRI K P UMAR S/O PADIABBA MAJOR, RESIDING AT NO.14/4A HANUBI ROAD, NEHRU NAGAR SAGAR, SHIMOGA DISTRICT.

¶13

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶14

THE NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO.LTD., J.L.B. ROAD, CHAMUNDIPURAM MYSORE CITY.

¶15

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.M.P. SRIKANTH., ADVOCATE FOR R2: NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH V/O DATED: 11.10.2013)

¶16

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT

¶17

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 27/06/2013, PASSED IN MVC NO.70/2008, ON THE FILE OF THE SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & JMFC., K.R.PET, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC:39524 MFA No. 1862 of 2018

¶20

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶22

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶23

This appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles

¶24

Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) has been filed by the claimant challenging by the judgment dated 27.06.2013 passed by MACT, K.R.Pet in MVC No.70/2008.

¶25

Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 22.12.2007 when the claimant was walking on the left side of the road near Maradahalli Gate, K.R.Pet-Mysore Road, at that time, car bearing registration No.KA-15-M-2313 being driven by its driver at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, dashed to the vehicle of the claimant. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized.

¶26

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:39524 MFA No. 1862 of 2018

¶27

The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act, seeking compensation. It was pleaded that he spent significant amount towards medical expenses, conveyance charges and other related costs. It was further pleaded that the accident occurred solely on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

¶28

Upon service of notice, the respondent No.2 appeared through counsel and filed written statement denying the averments made in the claim petition. The respondent No.1, despite service of notice, did not appear before the Tribunal and was placed ex-parte.

¶29

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter, recorded the evidence. The Tribunal, by impugned judgment and award has partly allowed the claim petition and held that the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.57,420/along with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount

¶30

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:39524 MFA No. 1862 of 2018

¶31

along with interest. Being aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed.

¶32

The learned counsel for the claimant has submitted that the claimant has sustained grievous injuries in the accident. As per disability certificate Ex.P-14, the claimant has suffered disability of 10%. The Tribunal has not awarded any compensation towards 'loss of future income'. He was treated as inpatient for a period of 4 days. Even after discharge from the hospital, he was not in a position to discharge his regular work. He has suffered lot of pain during treatment. Considering the same, the overall compensation granted by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Hence, he sought to allow the appeal.

¶33

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company has contended that the claimant has sustained simple injuries. The claimant has only produced disability certificate at Ex.P14, but he has not examined the doctor regarding nature of injuries and disability suffered by him. Therefore, considering the nature of

¶34

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:39524 MFA No. 1862 of 2018

¶35

injuries and medical records, the Tribunal has granted just and reasonable compensation and it does not call for interference. Further, the interest awarded by the Tribunal at 8% p.a. on the compensation amount is on the higher side. Hence, he sought to dismissal the appeal.

¶36

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.

¶37

It is not in dispute that the claimant has sustained injuries in the accident occurred on 22.12.2017 due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

¶38

As per wound certificate, the claimant has sustained head injury. As per disability certificate Ex.P-14, the claimant has suffered disability of 10%. He was treated as inpatient for a period of 4 days. He has not examined the doctor regarding nature of injuries and disability suffered by him. Therefore, considering the evidence of the claimant, nature of injuries mentioned in the wound

¶39

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:39524 MFA No. 1862 of 2018

¶40

certificate and medical records particularly disability certificate, I am inclined to award compensation of Rs.75,000/-, in addition to compensation awarded by the Tribunal.

¶41

11. In the result, the following order is passed:

¶42

ORDER

¶43

a) The appeal is allowed in part .

¶44

b) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified. c) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.132,420/- as against Rs.57,420/- awarded by the Tribunal .

¶45

d) Following the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of ‘MS.JOYEETA BOSE’ (supra) , the enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 6% p.a.

¶46

e) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount along with interest from the date of filing of the claim petition till the

¶47

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:39524 MFA No. 1862 of 2018

¶48

date of realization, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.

¶49

f) In view of the order dated 23.09.2024 passed by this Court, the claimant is not entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation for the delayed period of 1607 days in filing the appeal.

¶50

Sd/(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

¶51

DM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 31

Sri M v. Venkataramegowda v Sri K P Umar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri M v. Venkataramegowda v Sri K P Umar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P Venkatesh Vs Vijayakumar

The Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Remy Joseph

The Manager Vs Sri Puttappa @ Puttanna

Smt Sudha Ramakrishnan Vs the Manager

Mr Rambaboo Vs Mr Ram Avtar Sharma

Sri Vinod Kumar J Vs Sri Sriram Vedamurthy