The High Court allowed the Motor Vehicles First Appeal in part, modifying the Tribunal's award. It enhanced the compensation to Rs. 7,60,119/- by revising notional income and increasing amounts for pain and sufferings, loss of amenities, and future income.
Enhanced total compensation to Rs. 7,60,119/-; suit dismissed against other heads.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 4084 OF 2019 (MV)
BETWEEN:
SRI SAFFAN HUSEN S/O ABDUL ANWER AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS R/O D.NO.1/126, MAVINAKATTE KARKUNJE VILLAGE KUNDAPURA TALUK …APPELLANT (BY SRI. NAGARAJA HEGDE.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 3.11.2018 PASSED IN MVC NO. 890/16 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE & ADDITIONAL MACT, UDUPI, [SITTING AT KUNDAPURA], KUNDPURA, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.
THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR FINAL HEARING, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
ORAL JUDGMENT
This appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) has been filed by the claimant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 03.11.2018 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Udupi (sitting at Kundapura), Kundapura (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal’) in MVC No.890/2016.
registration No.GA-09/U-1107 being driven by its driver at a high speed and in a rash and negligent manner, dashed to the vehicle of the claimant. As a result of the aforesaid accident, the claimant sustained grievous injuries and was hospitalized.
the evidence. The claimant, in order to prove the case, examined himself as PW-1, and Dr.Ullas Shetty was examined as PW-2, and got exhibited documents namely Ex.P1 to Ex.P12. On behalf of the respondents, no witness was examined but got exhibited 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.6,15,820/- 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.
NC: 2024:KHC:37274 MFA No. 4084 of 2019
(i) Firstly, the Tribunal erred in assuming the monthly income of the claimant as Rs.9,000/-, despite claiming that he earned Rs.15,000/- per month.
(ii) Secondly, due to the accident, the claimant has sustained grievous injuries. He was treated as inpatient for a period of 41 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 and he has to suffer the disability throughout his life. Considering the same, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the heads of 'loss of amenities', 'pain and sufferings' and other incidental expenses are on the lower side. Hence, he sought to allow the appeal.
(i) Firstly, the assertion of claimant that he was earning Rs.15,000/- per month, remains unsubstantiated due to lack of documentary evidence. In the absence of
proof of income, the Tribunal has assessed the income of the claimant notionally.
(ii) Secondly, considering the injuries sustained by the claimant and considering the age and avocation of the claimant, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the heads of 'loss of amenities', 'pain and sufferings' and other incidental expenses are just and reasonable and it does not warrant interference. Hence, he sought to dismiss the appeal.
documents to substantiate his claim. Therefore, in the absence of proof of income, notional income has to be assessed. According to the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, for accidents occurred in the year 2016, notional income shall be taken at Rs.9,500/- p.m.
is ‘18’. Thus, the claimant is entitled for compensation of Rs.4,10,400/- (Rs.9,5001218*20%) on account of 'loss of future income'.
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.75,000/and the claimant is also entitled to compensation of Rs.60,000/- under the head of 'loss of amenities'.
| Compensation under different Heads |
As awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.) |
As awarded by this Court (Rs.) |
|---|---|---|
| Pain and sufferings | 40,000 | 75,000 |
| Medical expenses | 137,719 | 137,719 |
| Food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges |
10,000 | 20,000 |
| Loss of income during laid up period |
49,300 | 57,000 |
NC: 2024:KHC:37274 MFA No. 4084 of 2019
| Loss of amenities | 0 | 60,000 |
|---|---|---|
| Loss of future income | 388,800 | 410,400 |
| Total | 625,819 | 760,119 |
ORDER
(ii) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.
(iii) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.7,60,119/- as against Rs.6,25,819/- awarded by the Tribunal.
(iv) 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 a copy of this judgment.
Sd/(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE
CM/List No.: 1 Sl No.: 63
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the notional income of the appellant should be enhanced given the lack of documentary evidence.
Whether the compensation awarded for pain and sufferings, loss of amenities, and future income is just and reasonable requiring enhancement.
Whether the dismissal of the appeal should be set aside and compensation enhanced to a specific amount.
SRI SAFFAN HUSEN S/O ABDUL ANWER
SRI A ABBAS S/O ABDUL BYARI
SRI MOHAMMED ASHFAQ S/O SHEIKH HUSEN
THE BRANCH MANAGER THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD
H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
