Partly allowed

Shri Jinesh Alias Jinadatta S/O Suresh Alagawadi v. Sri Basavaraj V.S. S/O Veerappa

Karnataka HC16 Apr 2024MFA.CROB/100044/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court modified the Tribunal's award in a motor accident claim. The Court re-assessed the loss of future income and vehicle damage, rejected the claim for future medical expenses, and reduced the total compensation from Rs.5,00,000 to Rs.4,98,900.

What did the court decide?

Award modified; Total compensation set at Rs.4,98,900 against the Tribunal's Rs.5,00,000. Interest at 6% per annum directed.

Shri Jinesh Alias Jinadatta S/O Suresh Alagawadi Vs… — Motor Accident Claims | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6447 MFA No. 102569 of 2014 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100044 of 2022

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH

¶4

DATED THIS THE 16^TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024

¶5

BEFORE

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL MISCELLANEOUS FIRST APPEAL NO. 102569 OF 2014 (MV-I) C/W

¶7

MFA CROSS OBJ NO. 100044 OF 2022

¶8

IN MFA NO. 102569 OF 2014

¶9

BETWEEN:

¶10

BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, BANGALORE, BY ITS OFFICE AT KALABURGI COMPLEX LAMINGTON, OPP CORPORATION OFFICE, HUBLI, REP: BY SENIOR ASSISTANT, BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD, HUBLI OFFICE, 4TH FLOOR, V.A. KALABURGI MENSION, OPP: MUNCIPAL CORPORATION, LAMINGTON ROAD, HUBLI-580020.

¶11

…APPELLANT

¶12

(BY SRI. M. K. SOUDAGAR, ADVOCATE)

¶13

AND:

¶14

Digitally signed by JAGADISH T R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶15

SHRI JINESH URF JINADATTA S/O. SURESH ALAGAWADI, AGE: 22 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. PAAN BAZAAR, KALAGHATAGI, TAL: KALGHATI, DIST: DHARWAD.

¶16

SRI. BASAVARAJ V. S S/O. VEERAPPA, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: OWNER OF THE VECHICAL NO.KA-35/A6151, R/O. WARD NO.1, KALMETESHWAR TEMPLE, CHITWADAGI, HOSPET, TQ: HOSPET. …RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. CHETANA S. BIRAJ, ADV. FOR R1; NOTICE TO R2 DISPENSED WITH)

¶17

THIS MFA IS FILED U/S.173 (1) OF MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORDS IN CASE MVC NO.179/2012 ON

¶18

¶19

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6447 MFA No. 102569 of 2014 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100044 of 2022

¶20

THE FILE OF II ADDL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND AMACT DHARWAD, ITINERARY COURT AT KALGHATGI AND SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28/06/2014 BY ALLOWING THIS APPEAL WITH COST AND ETC.

¶21

IN MFA CROB NO.100044 OF 2022

¶22

BETWEEN:

¶23

SHRI. JINESH @ JINADATTA, S/O. SURESH ALAGAWADI, AGE: 29 YEARS, OCC: AGRICULTURE, R/O. PAAN BAZAR, KALGHATGI, TQ: KALGHATGI, DIST: DHARWAD.

¶24

…CROSS OBJECTOR

¶25

(BY SMT. CHETANA S. BIRAJ, ADVOCATE)

¶26

AND:

¶27

SRI. BASAVARAJ V. S. S/O. VEERAPPA, AGE: MAJOR, OCC: OWNER OF VEHICLE NO.KA-35/A-6151, R/O. WARD NO.1, KALMETESHWAR TEMPLE CHITWADAGI HOSPET, TQ: HOSPET.

¶28

BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO. BANGALORE, BY ITS OFFICE AT KALBURGI COMPLEX, LAMINGTON ROAD, OPP. CORPORATION OFFICE, HUBLI.

¶29

…RESPONDENTS

¶30

(BY SRI. M. K. SOUDAGAR, ADV. FOR R2; NOTICE TO R1 DISPENSED WITH)

¶31

THIS MFA.CROB IN MFA NO.102569/2014 IS FILED UNDER ORDER 41 RULE 22 OF CPC., READ WITH 173(1) OF MOTOR VEHICLE ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 28.06.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO. 179/2012 ON THE FILE OF THE II ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDITIONAL MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, DHARWAD, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶32

THIS APPEAL AND CROB, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶33

¶34

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6447 MFA No. 102569 of 2014 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100044 of 2022

¶35

JUDGMENT

¶36

Though this appeal is listed for admission, with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, it is taken up for final disposal.

¶37

2. MFA No.102569/2014 is filed by the insurance company and MFA.CROB No.100044/2022 is filed by the claimant. Both the appeals are arising out of judgment and award dated 28.06.2014 passed in MVC No.179/2012 on the file of III Addl. Senior Civil and AMACT, Dharwad (for short, ‘Tribunal’).

¶38

3. Heard the learned counsel Sri.M.K. Soudagar, appearing for the appellant/insurance company and learned counsel Smt. Chetana S Biraj, appearing for the claimant/crossobjector.

¶39

4. Learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company submits that the Tribunal has committed grave error in assessing the income, disability and award of compensation under the heads of medical expenses, towards the vehicle damage and laid-up period are on the higher side and seeks to reduce the same appropriately by taking note of the nature of disability suffered by the appellant and treatment provided to

¶40

¶41

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6447 MFA No. 102569 of 2014 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100044 of 2022

¶42

him. Hence, he seeks to allow the appeal filed by the insurance company.

¶43

5. Per contra, learned counsel Smt. Chetana S Biraj,

¶44

appearing for the claimant/cross-objector submits that the appellant sustained fractures of:

¶45

i. Compound communicated fracture shaft right femur lower end with intra articular extension.

¶46

ii. Inter condylar fracture upper end right tibia.

¶47

iii. Muscle tear.

¶48

Further, she submits that appellant underwent four

¶49

surgeries. Hence, the award of compensation by the Tribunal is just and appropriate and does not call for any modification. She submits that the Tribunal has erred in assessing the income of the injured/appellant at Rs.4,500/- per month which she seeks to re-assess the same.

¶50

6. I have heard the argument of learned counsel for the appellant/insurance company and learned counsel for the claimant/cross-objector and perused the material available on record. The cross-objector met with a road accident on 28.09.2011 and sustained fractures referred supra.

¶51

¶52

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6447 MFA No. 102569 of 2014 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100044 of 2022

¶53

7. In support of his claim, he entered the witness box and deposed as PW1 and also examined Dr.Suresh Korlhalli as PW2 who has provided treatment to the claimant and produced 23 documents as Ex.P1 to P23. Considering the oral evidence and documentary evidence on record, the Tribunal has awarded total compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- to the claimant. This Court taking note of the injury suffered by the claimant and considering the oral testimony of the PW2 is of the considered view that the Tribunal has justified in assessing the disability of the claimant at 15% which is unaltered. This Court re-assess the notional income of the injured at Rs.6,000/- per month by placing reliance on the notional income chart prepared by KSLSA. There is no dispute with regard to age of the appellant as 20 years, proper multiplier would be 18 and disability of the appellant at 15%. Thus, loss of future income due to disability is recomputed as under:

¶54

6,000 x 12 x 18 x 15% = 1,94,400/-

¶55

8. Insofar as award of compensation under the head of loss of amenities, pain and sufferings are unaltered. Under the head of medical expenses, it is modified by re-calculating bills produced by the claimants and the claimant would be entitled

¶56

¶57

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6447 MFA No. 102569 of 2014 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100044 of 2022

¶58

to Rs.1,32,500/- (1,37,200–4,700) . Insofar as award of compensation under the head of loss of income during the laidup period is unaltered, for the fact that the claimant was operated on four occasions. There is no evidence with regard to the entitlement of compensation under the head of future medical expenses and operation. Hence, the appellant would not be entitled to compensation for the aforesaid head. Insofar as the award of compensation under the head of food and nourishment is unaltered. This court keeping in mind, Ex.P5-the M.V. report and taking note of damage caused to the vehicle, re-assess the entitlement of compensation towards the vehicle damage to Rs.20,000/- . Thus, in all, the claimant shall be entitled to modified compensation under the following heads:

¶59

HEADS	AMOUNT (in Rs.)
Towards loss of future earnings	1,94,400/-
Towards loss of amenities	50,000/-
Towards pain and suffering	50,000/-
Towards medical expenses	1,32,500/-
Towards loss of income during laid-up period	27,000/-
Towards food and nourishment	25,000/-
Towards vehicle damage	20,000/-
Total	4,98,900/-

¶60

¶61

NC: 2024:KHC-D:6447 MFA No. 102569 of 2014 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100044 of 2022

¶62

9. Thus, the claimant shall be entitled to total

¶63

compensation of Rs.4,98,900/- as against Rs.5,00,000/awarded by the learned Tribunal.

¶64

10. In the result, this Court proceeds to pass the following:

¶65

ORDER

¶66

a) MFA No.102569/2014 and MFA CROB

¶67

No.100044/2022 stands allowed in part .

¶68

b) The impugned judgment and award of the Tribunal is modified to an extent that the claimant would be entitled to total compensation of Rs.4,98,900/- as against Rs.5,00,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶69

c) The entire compensation shall carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till the date of payment.

¶70

d) The Insurance Company shall deposit the entire compensation amount with accrued interest before the Tribunal within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of the judgment.

¶71

8 - NC: 2024:KHC-D:6447 MFA No. 102569 of 2014 C/W MFA.CROB No. 100044 of 2022

¶72

e) On such deposit, the same shall be released in

¶73

favour of the appellant/claimant.

¶74

f) Registry to transmit amount in deposit as well as

¶75

the records, if any, forthwith to the Tribunal.

¶76

g) Draw modified award accordingly.

¶77

Sd/JUDGE

¶78

RKM Ct-an List No.: 1 Sl No.: 22

Shri Jinesh Alias Jinadatta S/O Suresh Alagawadi v. Sri Basavaraj V.S. S/O Veerappa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Jinesh Alias Jinadatta S/O Suresh Alagawadi v. Sri Basavaraj V.S. S/O Veerappa

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

Shri Mahammad Jabiulla W/O Mahammeed Buden Alias Mahammed Abundansab Vs Shri Mahammad Raqulla S/O. Abdul Jabbarsab

Smt Asha W/O Vinayak Kwari Vs Shri Vinayak S/O Vittal Kwari

Smt Rooap W/O Praveen Malvi Vs Shri Praveen S/O Suresh Malvi

Karnataka Niravari Nigama Limited Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Karnataka Niravari Nigama Limited Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer

Karnataka Niravari Nigama Limited Vs the Special Land Acquisition Officer