Partly allowed

Mr Rambaboo v. Mr Ram Avtar Sharma

Karnataka HC24 Sept 2024MFA/1956/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the appeal in part against the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal award. The Court enhanced the compensation awarded to the claimant for pain and sufferings, food and conveyance, and loss of amenities while maintaining the amounts for medical expenses and loss of future income, directing the insurer to deposit the revised sum.

What did the court decide?

Modified the impugned judgment and awarded total compensation of Rs. 264,769/- to the claimant, to be paid by the Insurance Company within six weeks.

Mr Rambaboo Vs Mr Ram Avtar Sharma — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:39518 MFA No. 1956 of 2020

¶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. 1956 OF 2020 (MV)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MR. RAMBABOO S/O LATE LAKHAPATI NISANH AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS R/AT 45, KANCHANPUR VILLAGE TESHIL GOHAD BHIND MADHYAPRADESH -477001.

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY G.,ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

MR. RAM AVTAR SHARMA S/O JITAMAL SHARAM AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS R/AT PALADI, VIA KUDANEH LAXMAN GRAHA SHIKAR RAJASTHAN STATE -123456.

¶12

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

THE HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., OFFICE NO 2, C-98, III FLOOR SANGHVI UPASANA TOWER SUBASH MARG, C SCHEME JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN PIN 302001. REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER

¶14

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.RAVISHANKAR SHASTRY., ADVOCATE FOR R2: NOTICE TO R1 SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶15

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

¶16

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 26.06.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO. 263/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE

¶17

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:39518 MFA No. 1956 of 2020

¶18

M.A.C.T. AND III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, MANGALURU, DAKSHINA KANNADA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶22

This appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles

¶23

Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) has been filed by the claimant challenging by the judgment dated 26.06.2019 passed by MACT, Mangaluru, D.K., in MVC No.263/2016.

¶24

Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 19.11.2014 when the claimant was taking rest on the side of the parking yard at Laxmi Terminal, Panambur on Mangaluru-Udupi NH, at that time, lorry bearing registration No.RJ-23-GA-4243 being driven by its driver at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, dashed to the claimant. As a result of the

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:39518 MFA No. 1956 of 2020

¶26

aforesaid accident, the claimant sustained grievous

¶27

injuries and was hospitalized.

¶28

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.

¶29

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.2, despite service of notice, did not appear before the Tribunal and was placed ex-parte.

¶30

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

¶31

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:39518 MFA No. 1956 of 2020

¶32

the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.201,569/along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed.

¶33

The learned counsel for the claimant has raised the following contentions:

¶34

a) Firstly, the claimant has examined the doctor as PW-

¶35

The Tribunal undervalued the claimant's whole-body disability at 5%, contradicting the evidence of the doctor that the claimant suffered 15% disability to whole body.

¶36

b) Secondly, due to the accident, the claimant has sustained grievous injuries. He was treated as inpatient for a period of 27 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 awarded by the Tribunal is on the lower side.

¶37

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:39518 MFA No. 1956 of 2020

¶38

With the above contentions, the learned counsel

¶39

sought to allow the appeal.

¶40

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company has raised the following countercontentions:

¶41

a) Firstly, the Tribunal considering the injuries sustained by the claimant and evidence of the doctor, has rightly assessed the whole body disability at 5%. b) Secondly, considering the injuries sustained by the claimant and considering the age and avocation of the claimant, the overall compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and it does not warrant interference.

¶42

With the above contentions, the learned counsel sought to dismiss the appeal.

¶43

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

¶44

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:39518 MFA No. 1956 of 2020

¶45

It is not in dispute that the claimant has sustained injuries in the road traffic accident occurred on 19.11.2014 due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

¶46

As per wound certificate, the claimant has sustained left lower limb-open wound antero-medial aspectof left tibial extending to supre conylar region. Taking into consideration the deposition of the doctor and injuries mentioned in the wound certificate, the Tribunal has rightly taken the whole body disability, applied correct multiplier and awarded compensation of Rs.86,400/- on account of 'loss of future income'.

¶47

The nature of injuries indicates that the claimant must have been under rest and treatment for a period of 4 months. Consequently, the claimant is entitled for compensation of Rs.34,000/- (Rs.8,500*4 months) under the head ‘loss of income during laid up period’.

¶48

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:39518 MFA No. 1956 of 2020

¶49

The claimant was hospitalized as an inpatient for more than 27 days in the hospital and subsequently received further treatment. Therefore, I am inclined to enhance the compensation awarded under the head of ‘food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges’ from Rs.11,800/- to Rs.22,000/- .

¶50

Due to the accident, the claimant has suffered grievous injuries and also undergone surgery. Considering the prolonged pain during treatment as well as the permanent disability certified by the doctor, I am inclined to enhance the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of 'pain and sufferings' from Rs.40,000/to Rs.60,000/- and under the head of 'loss of amenities' from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.40,000/- .

¶51

Considering the nature of injuries, the compensation

¶52

awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is just and reasonable.

¶53

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:39518 MFA No. 1956 of 2020

¶54

15. Thus, the claimant is entitled to the following

¶55

compensation:

¶56

Compensation under different Heads	As awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.)	As awarded by this Court (Rs.)
Pain and sufferings	40,000	60,000
Medical expenses	22,369	22,369
Food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges	11,800	22,000
Loss of income during laid up period	21,000	34,000
Loss of amenities	20,000	40,000
Loss of future income	86,400	86,400
Total	201,569	264,769

¶57

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶58

ORDER

¶59

a) The appeal is allowed in part .

¶60

b) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.

¶61

9 - NC: 2024:KHC:39518 MFA No. 1956 of 2020

¶62

c) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.264,769/-.

¶63

d) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount along with interest @ 6% p.a. from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of realization, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.

¶64

Sd/(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

¶65

DM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 48

Mr Rambaboo v. Mr Ram Avtar Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Rambaboo v. Mr Ram Avtar Sharma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

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

Sri Vinod Kumar J Vs Sri Sriram Vedamurthy

Sri Walter D'Souza Vs Sri Sadananda Bhandary