Partly allowed

Smt Gangamma v. Aboobakkar

Karnataka HC12 Aug 2024MFA/2645/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a filed appeal against a Motor Vehicles Act claim decision, the High Court held that the Claims Tribunal's compensation award was low. The Court enhanced the total compensation from Rs. 30,000 to Rs. 55,000 and directed the insurance company to deposit the amount with interest.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was allowed in part; compensation enhanced to Rs. 55,000; order to deposit amount with interest within six weeks.

Smt Gangamma Vs Aboobakkar — Insurance | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:32177 MFA No. 2645 of 2020

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 2645 OF 2020 (MV)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT GANGAMMA AGED ABOUT 63 YEARS W/O LATE SHIVARAMA GOWDA R/AT KAJE DARKASU HOUSE KOYYUR VILLAGE,BELTHANGADY TLAUK

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. H.D. SOMESHA, ADVOCATE FOR SRI.RAJARAMA S.,ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

ABOOBAKKAR

¶12

S/O PODIMNONU BEARY

¶13

R/AT GOVBINDOORU HOUSE NYAYATHARPU VILLAGE BELTHANGADY TALUK D K DISTRICT.

¶14

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

THE MANAGER

¶16

M/S UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD MICRO OFFICE 2ND FLOOR SHRI KATHAYANI BUILDING OPP BUS STAND ELTHANGADY

¶17

…RESPONDENTS

¶18

(BY SRI.O.MAHESH., ADVOCATE FOR R2: APPEAL AGAINST R1 IS ABATED V/O DATED: 12.03.2024)

¶19

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:11.11.2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.1959/2017, ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, BELTHANGADY,

¶20

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:32177 MFA No. 2645 of 2020

¶21

PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶25

This appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) has been filed by the claimant challenging by the judgment dated 11.11.2019 passed by MACT, Belthangady in MVC No.1959/2017.

¶26

Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 22.04.2017 when the claimant was standing by the side of the mud road near Amar Drug house, Belthangady Kasaba Hobli, Bantwal-Kadur National Highway, at that time, autorickshaw bearing registration No.KA-21-A-2995 being driven by its driver at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, dashed to the

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:32177 MFA No. 2645 of 2020

¶28

claimant. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized.

¶29

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.

¶30

Upon service of notice, the respondents appeared through counsel and filed written statement denying the averments made in the claim petition.

¶31

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter, recorded the evidence. The claimant, in order to prove the case, examined himself as PW-1 and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P6. On behalf of the respondents, one witness was examined as RW-1 and got exhibited

¶32

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:32177 MFA No. 2645 of 2020

¶33

documents namely Ex.R1 to Ex.R3. The Claims Tribunal, by the impugned judgment, inter alia, held that the accident took place on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver, as a result of which, the claimant sustained injuries. The Tribunal further held that the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.30,000/- 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.

¶34

The learned counsel for the claimant has submitted

¶35

that as per wound certificate, the claimant has sustained laceration of parietal region area of scalp, abrasion over left cheek, contusion over upper lib, laceration over right leg, undisplaced fracture of right tibia. He was treated as inpatient for a period of 11 days. He has spent more than Rs.100,000/- towards 'medical expenses'. Even after discharge from the hospital, he was not in a position to discharge his regular work. He has suffered lot of pain

¶36

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:32177 MFA No. 2645 of 2020

¶37

during treatment. Considering the same, the overall compensation granted by the Tribunal is on the lower side. Hence, he sought to allow the appeal.

¶38

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company has contended that the claimant has sustained simple injuries and he has not examined the doctor regarding disability and injuries suffered by him. Even though the claimant contends that he has spent more than Rs.100,000/- towards 'medical expenses', but no supporting documents have been produced. Therefore, considering the nature of injuries, the Tribunal has granted just and reasonable compensation and it does not call for interference. Hence, he sought to dismissal the appeal.

¶39

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

¶40

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

¶41

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:32177 MFA No. 2645 of 2020

¶42

As per wound certificate, the claimant has sustained

¶43

laceration of parietal region area of scalp, abrasion over left cheek, contusion over upper lib, laceration over right leg, undisplaced fracture of right tibia. He was treated as inpatient for a period of 11 days. He has spent more than Rs.100,000/- towards 'medical expenses'. He has not examined the doctor regarding disability suffered by him. Therefore, considering the evidence of the claimant and nature of injuries mentioned in the wound certificate, I am inclined to award compensation of Rs.25,000/- in addition to global compensation of Rs.30,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶44

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶45

ORDER

¶46

a) The appeal is allowed in part .

¶47

b) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified. c) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of

¶48

Rs.55,000/- as against Rs.30,000/- awarded by the

¶49

Tribunal .

¶50

¶51

NC: 2024:KHC:32177 MFA No. 2645 of 2020

¶52

d) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the total 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.

¶53

Sd/(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

¶54

DM List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22

Smt Gangamma v. Aboobakkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Gangamma v. Aboobakkar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Nikhitha Vs Pruthvi S. Guptha

H Anand Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Thimmaiah Vs the Managing Director

Siddamallappa Vs Gangadharappa

Smt Yellamma Vs Sri C Shivakumar

Naveena H R Vs Ramesh