Partly allowed

Mr S E Shivakumar v. Sri Basavaraju S J

Karnataka HC26 Sept 2024MFA/6628/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court partially allowed an appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award. The Court enhanced compensation heads for pain and suffering, disability, future medical expenses, and attendant charges, increasing the total from Rs. 312,500 to Rs. 437,500. Interest was reduced to 6% p.a. following the Division Bench decision in Joyeeta Bose.

What did the court decide?

Total compensation enhanced to Rs. 437,500/-; interest reduced to 6% p.a.

Mr S E Shivakumar Vs Sri Basavaraju S J — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:40067 MFA No. 6628 of 2019

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 26^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 6628 OF 2019 (MV)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MR S E SHIVAKUMAR COURT AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS S/O S.ESWARAPPA R/AT NO.231, I BLOCK THUNGA SANKIRNA, KSRP QUATRAS KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 034.

¶8

…APPELLANT

¶9

(BY SRI. GOPAL L.T., ADVOCATE)

¶10

AND:

¶11

Digitally signed by HEMALATHA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

SRI BASAVARAJU S J MAJOR, S/O SHIVAPPA H JAKATI R/AT NO.6, YELLAMMA TEMPLE ROAD TIGALA CHODENAHALLI DODDABOMMASANDRA POST SARJAPURA ROAD, BENNGALURU-560 125.

¶13

SBI GENERAL INSUANCE CO. LTD NO.3 GROUND FLOOR FLAT FORM ROAD SHESHADRIPURAM BENGALURU-560 020.

¶14

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.SHARANAPPA GOWDA., ADVOCATE FOR R2: NOTICE TO R1 IS SERVED AND UNREPRESENTED)

¶15

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED: 07.03.2019,

¶16

¶17

NC: 2024:KHC:40067 MFA No. 6628 of 2019

¶18

PASSED IN MVC NO.4976/2017, ON THE FILE OF THE XXI ACMM., AND XXIII ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-25), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶19

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

¶20

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶21

This appeal under Section 173(1) of Motor Vehicles

¶22

Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) has been filed by the claimant challenging by the judgment dated 07.03.2019 passed by MACT, Bengaluru in MVC No.4976/2017.

¶23

Facts giving rise to the filing of the appeal briefly stated are that on 05.06.2017 when the claimant was proceeding on motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-01EP-1661 from residence to his clinic along with his mother,

¶24

near Aishwarya junction, Koramangala, at that time, car bearing registration No.KA-01-AE-2870 being driven by its

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:40067 MFA No. 6628 of 2019

¶26

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.

¶27

The claimant filed a petition under Section 166 of the Act, seeking compensation. It was pleaded that he spent significant amount towards medical expenses, conveyance charges and other related costs. It was further pleaded that the accident occurred solely on account of rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

¶28

Upon service of notice, the respondents appeared through counsel and filed written statements denying the averments made in the claim petition.

¶29

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the Claims Tribunal framed the issues and thereafter, recorded the evidence. The Tribunal, by impugned judgment and award has partly allowed the claim petition and held that

¶30

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:40067 MFA No. 6628 of 2019

¶31

the claimant is entitled to a compensation of Rs.312,500/along with interest at the rate of 8% p.a. and directed the Insurance Company to deposit the compensation amount along with interest. Being aggrieved, the present appeal has been filed.

¶32

The learned counsel for the claimant has raised the following contentions:

¶33

a) Firstly, due to the accident, the claimant has sustained grievous injuries. He was treated as inpatient for a period of more than 3 months. 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. Considering the same, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal towards 'pain and sufferings' and ‘disability’ and other incidental expenses is on the lower side. The Tribunal has failed to grant any compensation towards 'loss of future income'.

¶34

b) Secondly, the claimant has examined the doctor as PW-3. The doctor has stated that the claimant requires

¶35

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:40067 MFA No. 6628 of 2019

¶36

approximately Rs.200,000/towards 'future medical expenses'. But the Tribunal has awarded only Rs.50,000/-.

¶37

With the above contentions, the learned counsel sought to allow the appeal.

¶38

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Insurance Company has raised the following countercontentions:

¶39

a) Firstly, after recovering from the injuries, the claimant has continued his job. Hence, the Tribunal has rightly not awarded any compensation for 'loss of future income'.

¶40

b) Secondly, even though the doctor has stated that the claimant requires Rs.200,000/for 'future medical expenses'. But the claimant has not produced any estimation. Hence, the Tribunal has rightly awarded Rs.50,000/- under 'future medical expenses'.

¶41

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:40067 MFA No. 6628 of 2019

¶42

c) Thirdly, considering the injuries sustained by the claimant and considering the age and avocation of the claimant, the overall compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and it does not warrant interference.

¶43

d) Lastly, in light of the Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Ms.Joyeeta Bose and others –vVenkateshan.V and others (MFA 5896/2018 and connected matters disposed of on 24.8.2020), the rate of interest awarded by the Tribunal at 8% p.a. on the compensation amount appears excessive.

¶44

With the above contentions, the learned counsel sought to dismiss the appeal.

¶45

Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment and award of the Tribunal.

¶46

It is not in dispute that the claimant has sustained injuries in the road traffic accident occurred on 05.06.2017

¶47

7 - NC: 2024:KHC:40067 MFA No. 6628 of 2019

¶48

due to rash and negligent driving of the offending vehicle by its driver.

¶49

As per wound certificate, the claimant has sustained Type III B compound multifragmatary type fracture right femur, D/3 with comminuted fracture left patella, CLW right heel. The doctor has assessed the limb disability at 71% and whole body disability at 24%.

¶50

After recovering from injuries, the claimant has continued his job. Hence, the Tribunal has rightly not awarded any compensation for 'loss of future income’.

¶51

The claimant was hospitalized as an inpatient for more than 3 months in the hospital and subsequently received further treatment. Therefore, I am inclined to enhance the compensation awarded under the head of ‘food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges’ from Rs.20,000/- to Rs.45,000/- .

¶52

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:40067 MFA No. 6628 of 2019

¶53

Due to the accident, the claimant has suffered grievous injuries and also undergone surgery. Considering the prolonged pain during treatment as well as the permanent 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.50,000/to Rs.75,000/- and under the head of 'disability’ from Rs.50,000/- to Rs.100,000/- .

¶54

Although the evidence of the doctor suggests that the claimant requires approximately Rs.200,000/- for removal of implants, the claimant has not provided any estimate for future surgery. Considering the nature of the injuries and the evidence of the doctor, I am inclined to enhance the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under the head of 'future medical expenses' from Rs.50,000/- to

¶55

Rs.75,000/-.

¶56

Considering the nature of injuries, the compensation awarded by the Tribunal under other heads is just and reasonable.

¶57

9 - NC: 2024:KHC:40067 MFA No. 6628 of 2019

¶58

16. Thus, the claimant is entitled to the following

¶59

compensation:

¶60

Compensation under different Heads	As awarded by the Tribunal (Rs.)	As awarded by this Court (Rs.)
Pain and sufferings	50,000	75,000
Medical expenses	25,738	25,738
Food, nourishment, conveyance and attendant charges	20,000	45,000
Loss of income during laid up period	116,710	116,710
Loss of amenities/disability	50,000	100,000
Future medical expenses	50,000	75,000
Total	312,448	437,448
Rounded off	312,500	437,500

¶61

In the result, the following order is passed:

¶62

ORDER

¶63

a) The appeal is allowed in part .

¶64

b) The judgment of the Claims Tribunal is modified.

¶65

10 -

¶66

NC: 2024:KHC:40067 MFA No. 6628 of 2019

¶67

c) The claimant is entitled to a total compensation of Rs.437,500/-.

¶68

d) Following the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of ‘MS.JOYEETA BOSE’ (supra) , the enhanced compensation shall carry interest at 6%

¶69

p.a.

¶70

e) The Insurance Company is directed to deposit the compensation amount along with interest 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 copy of this judgment.

¶71

Sd/(H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD) JUDGE

¶72

¶73

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 46

Mr S E Shivakumar v. Sri Basavaraju S J

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr S E Shivakumar v. Sri Basavaraju S J

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Kenchamma Vs the Deputy Commissioner

Smt. Sparsha. Y. S, @ Kusuma, Vs Sri Prajwal S@ Prajwal S Gowda

Smt Ganashree S Vs Kiran Kumar M S

Sri Nanjundaswamy Vs M/S S L N Coffee Curing Works

Punith B T Vs Harish B S

Smt Roopa Subhas Lamani Vs Mr. Prateek M Baldota