Partly allowed

Sri Karunakara v. Mr Suresh Shetty

Karnataka HC14 Oct 2024MFA/3575/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal sought enhancement of motor accident compensation. The High Court recalculated future loss of income based on a higher notional monthly income and enhanced the general expenses award. The appeal was partially allowed with a total enhancement of Rs. 40,000.

What did the court decide?

The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is enhanced by Rs. 40,000; interest at 6% per annum awarded; Respondent No. 2 directed to deposit within eight weeks.

Sri Karunakara Vs Mr Suresh Shetty — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:41360 MFA No. 3575 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 3575 OF 2022 (MV-I)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SRI. KARUNAKARA, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, S/O LAKSHMANA KULAL, R/O HAKLU MANE, BILLADI VILLAGE, UDUPI TALUK AND DISTRICT - 576 221.

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. BHARATH POOJARI, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K. PRASANNA SHETTY, ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

MR. SURESH SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, S/O LATE KALAPPA SHETTY, R/O MALADI HEBBAGILU MANE, Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN TEKKATTE VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK, Location: HIGH UDUPI DIST - 576 221. COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER, BRANCH OFFICE: SREE LAXMI NARASIMHA COMPLEX, N.H. 66, OPP K.S.R.T.C DEPOT, VODERHOBLI VILLAGE, KUNDAPURA TALUK.

¶13

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. C. SHANKARA REDDY, ADVOCATE FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 IS DISPENSED WITH VIDE ORDER DATED 17.04.2023)

¶14

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:41360 MFA No. 3575 of 2022

¶15

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 09.11.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO.723/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MACT, UDUPI, SITTING AT KUNDAPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶16

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

¶17

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

¶18

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶19

Heard Sri Bharath Poojari, learned counsel who represents Sri K. Prasanna Shetty, learned counsel on record for the appellant as well as Sri C. Shankara Reddy, learned counsel on record for respondent No.2/Insurance Company.

¶20

This is a claimant's appeal seeking enhancement for compensation. The order under challenge is the one that is rendered by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Udupi, in MVC No.723/2018 dated 09.11.2021. As against the claim for `10,30,000/-, the Tribunal,

¶21

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:41360 MFA No. 3575 of 2022

¶22

through the impugned order, awarded a sum of `2,94,125/- as compensation.

¶23

Arguing the matter, Sri Bharath Poojari submits

¶24

that the appellant sustained grievous injuries in a road traffic accident. The appellant, as a cook, was earning 18,000/- per month. However, the Tribunal took the notional income of the appellant as 10,000/- per month, which is unjustifiable. Learned counsel also states that the accident occurred in the year 2018 and for the relevant period, the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority is taking the notional income as `12,500/- per month and at least the said figure should have been considered by the Tribunal. Learned counsel also states that the compensation awarded under other heads is also grossly low.

¶25

Per contra, Sri C.Shankara Reddy, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that having considered the nature of injuries sustained, the Tribunal awarded a justifiable sum of compensation. However, learned counsel did not raise any objection for taking the

¶26

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:41360 MFA No. 3575 of 2022

¶27

notional income as `12,500/- as prayed for. Also the figure

¶28

suggested and projected is justifiable.

¶29

The Tribunal, through the impugned order,

¶30

awarded a sum of `2,94,125/- as compensation, divided under the following heads:

¶31

Heads	Amount in Rs.
Pain and suffering	50,000-00
Medical expenses	46,125-00
Loss of earning during	60,000-00
treatment period
Loss of income due to	1,08,000-00
disability
Future medical expenses	20,000-00
Loss of amenities	10,000-00
Total	2,94,125-00

¶32

Undisputedly, the appellant sustained a compound comminuted trimalleolar fracture with dislocation of right ankle, which is grievous in nature. Also, it is not in dispute that the appellant underwent surgery. Subjecting the evidence that is brought on record to scrutiny, the Tribunal took the disability in respect of the whole body as 6%, which needs no interference. Also, the assessment of age as 38 years and applying the multiplier 15 needs no interference. Taking the notional income of

¶33

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:41360 MFA No. 3575 of 2022

¶34

the appellant as `12,500/- per month, applying the appropriate multiplier 15, with disability at 6% in respect of whole body, the amount which the appellant is entitled to under the head loss of future income on account of permanent physical disability is as under:

¶35

Heads	Amount in Rs.
Notional monthly income	12,500-00
Annual income	1,50,000-00
Apply appropriate multiplier '15'	22,50,000-00
6% permanent physical	1,35,000-00
disability, Loss of future
income

¶36

The Tribunal, through the impugned order, awarded a sum of 1,08,000/- under the head loss of future income. Thus, the enhancement will be 27,000/(1,35,000/- - 1,08,000/-). The Tribunal awarded a sum of 6,000/- only towards food, extra nourishment, diet, attendant and conveyance charges. The amount, thus awarded is grossly low. Therefore, this Court is of the view that a sum of 13,000/- is required to be awarded in addition to said sum of `6,000/-. Thus, the total amount which the appellant is entitled to in addition to the sum

¶37

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:41360 MFA No. 3575 of 2022

¶38

that is awarded as compensation by the Tribunal is 40,000/- (27,000/-+`13,000/-). Thus, in the light of the forgoing discussion, the appeal is disposed of with the following:-

¶39

ORDER

¶40

(i) The appeal is allowed in part;

¶41

(ii) The compensation awarded by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Udupi through orders in MVC No.723/2018, dated 09.11.2021 is enhanced by `40,000/-;

¶42

(ii) The enchanced sum shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the petition till the date of deposit;

¶43

(iii) Respondent No.2 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order;

¶44

(iv) On deposit, the appellant is entitled to withdraw the entire amount.

¶45

CT: BHK

¶46

Sd/(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE

¶47

HDK

Sri Karunakara v. Mr Suresh Shetty

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Karunakara v. Mr Suresh Shetty

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. Umadevi Vs Sri. B. H. Harisha

Smt. Pushpa Vs Smt. Shilpa

Lakshmamma Vs Mohd Rishad

Managing Director Vs Shashikumar

Smt. Mahadevamma Vs Sri.Lokesh

Sri Hemanthkumar N Vs Sri Nagaraju R