Partly allowed

Sri Boregowda v. Sri Srinivasa H B

Karnataka HC13 Sept 2024MFA/3067/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal seeking enhancement of compensation for injuries (fracture of patella) sustained in a road traffic accident. The court upheld the tribunal's award under all heads but found no amount had been granted for loss of amenities in life, and enhanced the compensation by Rs.50,000 with 6% interest.

What did the court decide?

Compensation enhanced by Rs.50,000 with 6% interest from date of petition till deposit; insurer to deposit within eight weeks; pay and recovery order intact.

Sri Boregowda Vs Sri Srinivasa H B — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:37763 MFA No. 3067 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 13^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3067 OF 2022 (MV-I)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. BOREGOWDA, S/O LATE NANJEGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/AT NO.6, 2^ND CROSS, JANATHA COLONY, NAYANDAHALLI, BANGALORE - 560 091, PERMANENT ADDRESS: MAYANNAKOPPLU VILLAGE, BINDIGANAVILE HOBLI, MANDYA DISTRICT.

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. CHIKKANNA C, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by YAMUNA K L Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶12

SRI. SRINIVASA H.B, S/O BOREGOWDA, NO. 15, KEREPALYAM, M. KRISHNA LAYOUT, HOSAKERE HALLI, BENGALURU - 560 085.

¶13

M/S. IFFCO TOKIO GENRAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS DIVISIONAL MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE, SURGICAL BUSINESS UNIT, NO. 8, 3RD FLOOR, III^RD BLOCK, KSCMS BUILDING, CUNNIGHAM ROAD, BANGALORE - 560 001.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. S.V. HEGDE MULKHAND, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 22.08.2024)

¶15

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:37763 MFA No. 3067 of 2022

¶16

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 25.11.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.4310/2019 ON THE FILE OF THE CHIEF JUDGE, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, MEMBER, PRL. MACT, BENGALURU SCCH-1, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶17

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

¶18

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

¶19

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶20

Heard Sri.Chikkanna.C, learned counsel for the appellant who appears physically before this Court. Also heard Sri.S.V.Hegde Mulkhand, learned counsel for respondent No.2 who appears through video conference.

¶21

Challenge in this appeal is the order that is rendered by the Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru in M.V.C. No.4310/2019 dated 25.11.2021.

¶22

The appellant who sustained injuries in a road traffic accident filed a petition claiming compensation of Rs.30,00,000/in total. The tribunal through the

¶23

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:37763 MFA No. 3067 of 2022

¶24

impugned order awarded a sum of Rs.1,77,200/- as compensation. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed.

¶25

Sri.Chikkanna.C, learned counsel for appellant, arguing the matter, contends that the appellant sustained fracture of patella which is a grievous injury. He took treatment as inpatient and during the course of treatment, he underwent surgery. The appellant as a labourer cum loader was earning Rs.20,000/- per month. However, the tribunal taking the notional income as Rs.12,000/- per month, awarded meager sum as compensation under the head loss of future earnings. Learned counsel states that a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- is required to be awarded in addition to the sum that is granted by the tribunal as compensation.

¶26

Vehemently opposing the submission thus made, learned counsel Sri.S.V.Hegde Mulkhand contends that the tribunal taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case, awarded justifiable sum as

¶27

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:37763 MFA No. 3067 of 2022

¶28

compensation and thus the appeal itself is not

¶29

maintainable.

¶30

The tribunal, subjecting the evidence of PW-1 and

¶31

2, Ex.P-5 to P-15 to scrutiny came to a conclusion that the

¶32

appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.1,77,200/- as

¶33

compensation divided under following heads:-

¶34

Heads	Amount in Rs.
Pain and sufferings	40,000-00
Medical expenses	26,600-00
Food and nourishment, attendant charges	27,000-00
Transportation charges	2,000-00
Loss of future earning	57,600-00
capacity due to permanent disability
Loss of income during	24,000-00
treatment and rest period
Total	1,77,200-00

¶35

As rightly submitted by Sri.S.V.Hegde Mulkhand,

¶36

having considered the nature of injuries sustained and the findings given with regard to the disability, the tribunal awarded justifiable sum under all heads.

¶37

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:37763 MFA No. 3067 of 2022

¶38

However, the tribunal failed to award any amount as compensation towards loss of amenities in life. The appellant was aged about 68 years by the date of accident. The amount of pain the appellant would have suffered due to fracture of patella can be imagined. Also there is a clear mention that his right knee flexion restricted. Having considered these facts and as no amount is awarded under the head loss of amenities in life, this Court is of the view that in addition to the sum that is awarded by the tribunal as compensation, the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.50,000/- globally.

¶39

Thus, in the light of the said finding, the appeal is disposed of with the following:-

¶40

ORDER

¶41

i. The appeal is allowed in part.

¶42

ii. The compensation that is awarded by the Principal Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bengaluru through

¶43

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:37763 MFA No. 3067 of 2022

¶44

orders in M.V.C. No.4310/2019 dated 25.11.2021 is enhanced by Rs.50,000/-

¶45

iii. The enhanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of deposit.

¶46

iv. The 2^nd respondent is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶47

v. On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the same.

¶48

vi. The order of pay and recovery remains intact.

¶49

Sd/(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE

¶50

¶51

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 50 CT: BHK

Sri Boregowda v. Sri Srinivasa H B

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Boregowda v. Sri Srinivasa H B

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

Puttanarasamma Vs Manju K

Dinesh M Vs Mr Jagadeesh

Thanfi Kader. M. P. Vs H.D.F.C. Ergo General Insurance Company Limited

Sri C Adisheshaiah Chalasani Vs Smt Krishnamma

Sri. M. Narayanappa Vs M. Manjunath

Suhas N Vs Rakesh H R