Partly allowed

Afzal Ahmad v. Future General India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Karnataka HC20 Sept 2024MFA/4496/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

First appeal against Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal award challenging the compensation amount for grievous injury to the left leg. The High Court held the global award of Rs. 50,000 was grossly low given the nature of injury and treatment. The Court enhanced the compensation by Rs. 40,000.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed in part; compensation enhanced by Rs. 40,000/- with interest at 6% per annum.

Afzal Ahmad Vs Future General India Insurance Co. Ltd. — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:38951 MFA No. 4496 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 20^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO.4496 OF 2021(MV-I)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

AFZAL AHMAD S/O. NISAR AHMAD, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS, R/AT WARD NO 23, BIRUR, LINGADAHALLI ROAD, BIRUR RURAL, BIRUR, CHIKKAMAGALURU - 577 116.

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. VIJAY KUMAR T.,ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by AASEEFA PARVEEN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

FUTURE GENERAL INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., REP. BY ITS MANAGER, PASADENA, NO 18/1, ( OLD NO 125/A) 3^RD FLOOR, ASHOKA PILLER ROAD, 1^ST BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 082.

¶13

SRI MUNIRAJ K., AGED MAJOR, R/AT NO. 329, 3^RD CROSS, KODIHALLI, OLD AIR PORT ROAD, BENGALURU- 560 008.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS

¶15

(BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN REDDY N.A., ADVOCATE FOR SRI.B.C. SHIVANNE GOWDA, ADVOCATE FOR R1; R2- SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶16

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:38951 MFA No. 4496 of 2021

¶17

THIS MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 17.03.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO. 4164/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND MACT BENGALURU (SCCH-1), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶18

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

¶19

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA

¶20

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶21

Heard Sri.Vijay Kumar.T learned counsel for the appellant

¶22

as well as Sri.Mallikarjun Reddy.N.A. learned counsel who represents Sri.B.C.Shivanne Gowda learned counsel on record for respondent No.1. No representation for Respondent No.2 despite service of notice.

¶23

Projecting that the amount awarded as compensation is grossly low, the injured is before this Court through this appeal. He challenges the order that is passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bangalore in MVC No.4164/2017 dated 17.03.2021.

¶24

Sri.Vijay Kumar.T learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant sustained fracture of both bones of

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:38951 MFA No. 4496 of 2021

¶26

left leg which is a grievous injury. The appellant took treatment at Aster CMI Hospital, Bangalore and thereafter through Puttur bone setter, Nelamangala and later at Bowring Hospital, Bangalore. Though the appellant submitted all those facts and produced medical bills and prescriptions, the Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation globally, which is unjustifiable. Learned counsel thereby seeks for enhancement of compensation.

¶27

Contradicting the submission thus made, Sri.Mallikarjuna Reddy.N.A. learned counsel for respondent No.1 contends that the appellant failed to examine either the doctor who treated him or the expert who assessed the disability. No material whatsoever was produced with regard to the loss sustained in terms of money. Therefore, the award passed by the Tribunal is justifiable.

¶28

It is not in dispute that the appellant sustained a grievous injury to his left leg and took treatment. Having considered the fact that the injury is to one of the lower limbs, it can safely be inferred that the appellant would not have attended his normal pursuits atleast for a period of 2 months.

¶29

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:38951 MFA No. 4496 of 2021

¶30

Award of Rs.50,000/- globally for the pain and suffering, for the transportation charges, for the attendant charges, for the food and nourishment, towards medical expenses and loss of amenities in life is grossly low. Even if it is taken into consideration that the appellant was earning a nominal sum of Rs.10,000/- per month, he would be entitled to a sum of Rs.20,000/- under the head loss of earnings during laid up period. Also nominal amount atleast is required to be awarded for the expenses the appellant would have incurred towards transportation, attendant charges, food and nourishment. Further having considered the nature of injuries sustained, the appellant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- under the head pain and suffering. Therefore, in all this Court is of the view that the appellant is entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- in addition to the sum that is awarded by the Tribunal as compensation. Thus, the appeal is allowed with the following:

¶31

ORDER

¶32

(i) The appeal is allowed in part.

¶33

(ii) The compensation that is granted by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bangalore through orders in MVC No.4164/2017 dated 17.03.2021 is enhanced by Rs.40,000/-.

¶34

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:38951 MFA No. 4496 of 2021

¶35

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

¶36

(v) Respondent No.1 is directed to deposit the enhanced sum within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶37

(vi) The order of pay and recovery applies to the enhanced sum as well.

¶38

(vii) On such deposit, the appellant is permitted to withdraw the entire amount.

¶39

Sd/(DR.CHILLAKUR SUMALATHA) JUDGE

¶40

DS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 43

Afzal Ahmad v. Future General India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Afzal Ahmad v. Future General India Insurance Co. Ltd.

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

Sri Ashfaq Ahmed Vs M/S National Insurance Co. Ltd.

Smt Rangamma Vs Smt Kariyamma

Smt. Lalithamma Vs Sri. Santhosh Kumar K G

Smt. Kavitha Basavaraj Uppar Vs Aishwarya Chakraborty

Smt. Rajamma Vs the Manager

Smt Prameela Vs Mr Mohammed Soukath