Partly allowed

Lokesh R v. Narasegowda

Karnataka HC9 Dec 2024MFA/492/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Full Bench allowed the first appeal filed by a motor accident claimant aggrieved by the Tribunal's exoneration of the insurer's liability due to lack of a valid permit. The Court applied settled law that insurers must pay compensation and recover from the vehicle owner. The compensation quantum was enhanced based on notional income and medical evidence, totaling Rs. 3,09,680 with interest.

What did the court decide?

Total compensation enhanced to Rs. 3,09,680 with 6% interest; insurer directed to deposit amount within two months with liberty to recover from vehicle owner.

Lokesh R Vs Narasegowda — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:50745 MFA No. 492 of 2018

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA

¶7

MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 492 OF 2018

¶8

(MV-I)

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

LOKESH R S/O RENUKAIAH AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT GOLLARAHATTI HAGALAKOTE POST KASABA HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK RAMANGARAM DISTRICT AND ALSO R/AT NEAR MUDALAGIRI TEMPLLE DODDAGOLLARAHATTI, MAGADI MAIN ROAD BANGALORE 560 091.

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

(BY SRI. N R RANGEGOWDA .,ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

NARASEGOWDA S/O NARASAIAH AGED MAJOR R/AT CHOLANAYAKANAHALLI MAGADI MAIN ROAD KASABA HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562120.

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:50745 MFA No. 492 of 2018

¶18

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD, T.P. HUB, 2ND FLOOR MAHALAKSHMI CHAMBERS M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE 560 001.

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI.G.V. DAYANANDA.,ADVOCATE FOR R1: SRI. K N SRINIVAS, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

¶21

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED:12.08.2017 PASSED IN MVC NO.1873/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BENGALURU (SCCH-18), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶22

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

¶23

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA

¶24

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶25

The claimant, being aggrieved by the exoneration of

¶26

the liability on the insurer and also regarding the compensation of Rs.2,36,000/- awarded by the Tribunal, is in appeal.

¶27

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:50745 MFA No. 492 of 2018

¶28

The Tribunal had exonerated the insurer from the

¶29

liability solely on the ground that there was no valid permit as on the date of the accident. In other words, it is the case of the insurer that there was a breach of policy condition. It is settled law that whenever the insurer pleads violation of policy conditions, the insurer would have to nevertheless pay the compensation and thereafter proceeded to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle as per the decision of a Full Bench of this Court in the case of New India Assurance Company Limited vs . Yellavva And Another reported in 2020 ACJ 2560 . Consequently, the finding of the Tribunal regarding the liability is set aside. It is ordered that the insurer shall pay the compensation and shall recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle.

¶30

The Tribunal on assessment of the evidence has recorded a finding that the claimant has suffered fracture of lower 1/3^rd right fibula with degloving injury.

¶31

¶32

NC: 2024:KHC:50745 MFA No. 492 of 2018

¶33

The Tribunal has thereafter awarded the following sums as compensation:

¶34

Sl. No.	Particulars	Amount in (Rs.)
1.	Pain and sufferings	25,000
2.	Loss of future income	77,000
3.	Medical expenses	75,000
4.	Loss of income during the laid up period	26,000
5.	Conveyance, food, nourishment, attendant charges	8,000
6.	Loss of amenities in life	25,000
	Total	2,36,000

¶35

As regards the quantum of compensation, the Tribunal on an analysis of the medical evidence has concluded that the claimant has suffered whole body disability at 6%. In my view, having regard to the fact that the claimant had suffered a fracture of the right fibula, the assessment of the whole body disability at 6% by the Tribunal cannot be found fault with.

¶36

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:50745 MFA No. 492 of 2018

¶37

As regards the notional income is concerned, the Tribunal has determined the monthly income, notionally, at Rs.8,000/-. Since there is no credible documentary evidence to ascertain the actual monthly income, it would be appropriate and prudent to adopt the monthly income determined by Karnataka State Legal Services Authority, which, for the accident of the year 2015, would be Rs.9,000/-.

¶38

As the claimant was aged 31 years, a multiplier of '16' would have to be applied. Consequently, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.1,03,680/- (9,000 x 12 x 16 x 6%) towards 'loss of future income' .

¶39

As a consequence, the amount of Rs.26,000/awarded by the Tribunal towards 'loss of income during the laid up period' would also stand enhanced to Rs.36,000/- (9,000 X 4months).

¶40

Having regard to the injuries suffered by the claimant, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of

¶41

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:50745 MFA No. 492 of 2018

¶42

Rs.40,000/- towards 'pain and suffering' as against

¶43

Rs.25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶44

Having regard to the lasting effects of the injuries on

¶45

the claimant, the claimant would be entitled to a sum of Rs.40,000/- towards loss of amenities, as against the sum of Rs.25,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶46

Having regard to the length of the stay of the claimant in the hospital, the claimant would also be entitled to 'conveyance, food and nourishment and attendant charges' at Rs.15,000/- as against the sum of Rs.8,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶47

The sums awarded as medical expenses by the Tribunal, being based on documentary evidence, does not call for modification and hence confirmed.

¶48

NC: 2024:KHC:50745 MFA No. 492 of 2018

¶49

¶50

13. Consequently, the award of the Tribunal is modified

¶51

and the claimant would be entitled to the following compensation:

¶52

Sl. No.	Compensation under different Heads	As awarded by the Tribunal	As awarded by this Court
		(Rs.)	(Rs.)
1.	Pain and sufferings	25,000	40,000
2.	Loss of future income	77,000	1,03,680
3.	Medical expenses	75,000	75,000
5.	Loss of income during the laid up period	26,000	36,000
6.	Conveyance, food, nourishment, attendant charges	8,000	15,000
7.	Loss of amenities in life	25,000	40,000
	Total	2,36,000	3,09,680

¶53

Thus, the claimant is held entitled to the total compensation of Rs.3,09,680/- as against Rs.2,36,000/-, along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till its realization.

¶54

NC: 2024:KHC:50745 MFA No. 492 of 2018

¶55

¶56

The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the amount of compensation awarded within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment with liberty to recover the same from the owner of the offending vehicle.

¶57

The disbursement of the compensation amount shall

¶58

be in terms of the award of the Tribunal.

¶59

This appeal is accordingly allowed in part .

¶60

Sd/(N S SANJAY GOWDA) JUDGE

¶61

¶62

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 6

Lokesh R v. Narasegowda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lokesh R v. Narasegowda

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G Rajashekar @ Rajasekharappa Vs K R Rudrappa

Smt Sudha J Vs Sri Santhosh Kumar K P

Sri Rameshnaika H S Vs the State of Karnataka

Smt. Harshada B S Vs Sri. Girisha S K

Lakshminarayana Vs Divisional Manager

Kum Nischitha Vs United India Insurance Co. Ltd.