Dismissed

Managing Director, Nwkrtc, v. Yallappa S/O Galeppa Katti

Karnataka HC2 Aug 2024MFA/22464/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

During a session of the High Court of Karnataka, the court dismissed an appeal filed against the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal. The court held that the awarded compensation for personal injuries sustained in a road accident was just and proper based on the evidence.

What did the court decide?

The appeal against the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal award was dismissed in its entirety.

Managing Director, Nwkrtc, Vs Yallappa S/O Galeppa… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:10928 MFA No. 22464 of 2012

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 BEFORE

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶4

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 22464 OF 2012

¶5

BETWEEN:

¶6

MANAGING DIRECTOR, NWKRTC, GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI, AND ITS SELF INSURANCE FUND, GOKUL ROAD, HUBLI, THE ADDRESS OF THE APPELLANT WAS WRONGLY MENTIONED BY THE RESPONDENT INSTEAD OF NWKRTC IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN CALLED NEKRTC, THE APPELLANT IS REP. BY ITS CHIEF LAW OFFICER, CENTRAL OFFICE SARIGE SADANA, GULBARGA.

¶7

…APPELLANT

¶8

(BY SRI. SHIVAKUMAR S. BADAWADAGI, ADVOCATE)

¶9

AND:

¶10

YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR

¶11

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

YALLAPPA S/O. GALEPPA KATTI, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE AND COOLIE, R/O: TANAKANAKALLA, TQ: KOPPAL, NOW R/O: UNAKAL, HUBLI, DIST: DHARWAD.

¶13

(BY SRI. LAXMAN C. KULKARNI AND SRI. PRAVEEN G. KULKARNI, ADVOCATES)

¶14

…RESPONDENT

¶15

THIS MFA IS FILED U/SEC. 173(1) OF MV ACT, AGAINST JUDGMENT AND AWARD DTD:04-02-2012, PASSED IN MVC.NO.391/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, ADDL. MACT, HUBLI, AWARDING THE COMPENSATION OF RS.2,20,000/- WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 6% P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF REALISATION, WITHIN SIX WEEKS FROM THE DATE OF THE ORDER.

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:10928 MFA No. 22464 of 2012

¶17

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

¶18

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

This appeal is filed by Corporation against

¶21

quantum to compensation awarded by the Tribunal in MVC No.391/2011 dated 04.02.2012 passed by the Principal Senior Civil Judge and Additional M.A.C.T, Hubli.

¶22

The facts in brief are that on 24.01.2011 at 8.30 hours when the petitioner was returning from his land on the left side of the road of Koppal-Kushtagi road. K.S.R.T.C bus bearing No.KA-37/F-318 driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and dashed against the respondent –claimant, as result of which the petitioner has sustained grievous injuries and taken treatment as an inpatient and outpatient and spent huge amount. The claimant has stated that he is agriculturist and earning Rs.6,000/- per month and due to the accidental injuries he became permanently disabled and unable to do his work as earlier.

¶23

3 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:10928 MFA No. 22464 of 2012

¶24

The claimant has been examined as P.W.1 and got

¶25

marked documents as Ex.P1 to P26. The respondent – corporation official has been examined as R.W.1 and no documents were marked on the side of the Corporation. The tribunal after appreciating the evidence on record has

¶26

held that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent

¶27

driving of KSRTC bus by driver and awarded compensation

¶28

as under:

¶29

Pain and Agony Rs.70,000/-

¶30

Medical, diet and conveyance Rs.1,00,000/-

¶31

Future loss of amenities and Inconvenience Rs.50,000/Total: Rs.2,20,000/-

¶32

Being aggrieved by the said quantum of

¶33

compensation, the appellant –corporation has filed this appeal.

¶34

Heard learned counsel for the appellant –

¶35

corporation.

¶36

Learned counsel for the appellant –corporation

¶37

would contend that the award of compensation under the head of pain and agony and also under the head of future

¶38

4 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:10928 MFA No. 22464 of 2012

¶39

loss of amenities and Inconvenience are higher side. She contends that huge compensation has been awarded on the head of medical expenses. With this, she prayed to reduce the amount of compensation awarded.

¶40

Having heard learned counsel for the appellant

¶41

–corporation, this Court has perused the impugned judgment and award and trial Court records.

¶42

The respondent –claimant has sustained the

¶43

following injuries which are noted in Ex.P5 -wound certificate are;

¶44

Facture of left tibia

¶45

Facture of right tibia

¶46

Fracture of right femur

¶47

Lateral patella depression and other simple injuries.

¶48

The respondent –claimant was admitted in the hospital from 24.01.2011 to 06.03.2011. The respondent –claimant has also taken treatment in KIMS Hospital Hubballi and undergone surgery for factures. Considering the said aspect the award of sum of Rs.70,000/- towards pain and agony is just and proper.

¶49

5 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:10928 MFA No. 22464 of 2012

¶50

Ex.P8 contains 17 medical bills, Ex.P9 contains

¶51

12 prescription slips, Ex.P10 is Clinical biochemistry report, Ex.P11 is Continued case sheet, EX.P12 is Screening test report, Ex.P15 contains 20 X-rays and reports and Ex.P20 is medical bills issued by KIMS hospital, Hubballi, Ex.P23 is bills issued by KIMS hospital, Hubballi, EX.P25 is scan films and Ex.P26 is X-ray films. Considering these aspects even though the respondent – claimant has made claim of Rs.2,00,000/- for medical expenses, the tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- considering the above documents. The said award of Rs.1,00,000/- towards medical expenses is just and proper.

¶52

The respondent –claimant is aged about 60 years and he is agriculturist. Even though he claimed that he was earning Rs.6,000/- per month. The tribunal taken into consideration of loss of amenities and inconvenience has rightly awarded Rs.50,000/- in the said head.

¶53

Considering all these aspects, the tribunal has awarded just and proper compensation to the respondent

¶54

¶55

NC: 2024:KHC-D:10928 MFA No. 22464 of 2012

¶56

–claimant. There are no grounds to reduce the

¶57

compensation.

¶58

In the result, the appeal is dismissed.

¶59

Sd/(SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR) JUDGE

¶60

DSP

¶61

CT:ANB List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29

Managing Director, Nwkrtc, v. Yallappa S/O Galeppa Katti

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Managing Director, Nwkrtc, v. Yallappa S/O Galeppa Katti

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

Arun S Vs State of Karnataka by

Sri Vishwanath S Hegde Vs Shri Moulali S/O Bashasab Shiggavii

Smt. Seembran D/O Rabbani Bhatti Vs Shri Moulali S/O Bashasab Shiggavi

Ishwar S/O. Malleshappa Vakkund Vs the M D Nwkrtc, Gokul Road

Smt Latha Angadi W/O Manojkumar Angadi Vs M/S L G Technologies

Bharat Shekharappa Vs Shakuntala W/O Shivaram