Annayya Vs Reliance General Insurance Company Limited

ANNAYYA S/O MANJUNATH, AGED 28 YEARS, SINCE THE APPELLANT MENTALLY RETORTED REPRESENTED BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN ANT MOTHER NETRAVATHI W/O MANJUNATH, AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS, RESIDING A/T NO.24, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, 2^ND CROSS, GANABHARATHI CAMPUS, MARIYAPPANAPALYA, BENGALURU-560 056.

¶15

…APPELLANT

¶16

(BY SRI. SHANTHARAJ.K., ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED BY ITS MANAGER, EAST WING 5^TH FLOOR NO.28, CENTENARY BUILDING,

¶19

2 -

¶20

NC: 2025:KHC:46805-DB MFA No. 1149 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6684 of 2019

¶21

HC-KAR

¶22

M.G.ROAD, BENGALURU 560 001.

¶23

T.R.RAJAN DEAD BY HIS LR'S,

¶24

A.ARAVINDA

¶25

S/O LATE T.R.RAJAN, AGED MAJOR, R/AT NO. 498/1, SHILPA, OPP. TO PRABHA EYE CLINIC, 40^TH CROSS, 8^TH BLOCK, JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 082.

¶26

…RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. D.VIJAYKUMAR., ADVOCATE FOR R1 V/O DT:17.01.2022 NOTICE TO R2-DISPENSED WITH)

¶27

THIS MFA FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT, 1988, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DT.15.04.2019 PASSED IN MVC NO.6862/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDITIONAL JUDGE COURT OF SMALL CAUSES AND MACT, BENGALURU,(SCCH-18), PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶28

IN MFA NO. 6684/2019

¶29

BETWEEN:

¶30

M/S. RELIANCE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD., EAST WING, 5^TH FLOOR, NO.28, CENTENARY BUILDING, M.G. ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001, REP BY ITS MANAGER.

¶31

...APPELLANT

¶32

(BY SRI. D.VIJAYKUMAR., ADVOCATE)

¶33

AND:

¶34

ANNAYYA S/O. MANJUNATH, NOW AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,

¶35

3 -

¶36

NC: 2025:KHC:46805-DB MFA No. 1149 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6684 of 2019

¶37

HC-KAR

¶38

SINCE PETITIONER IS IN COMA, REPRESENTED BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN, MOTHER SMT. NETHRAVATHI, W/O. MANJUNATH, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT NO.24, 1^ST MAIN ROAD, 2^ND CROSS, GNANABHARATHI CAMPUS, MARIYAPPANAPALYA, BANGALORE-560 056.

¶39

MR. T.R.RAJAN SINCE DEAD REP BY HIS LR, 2(A) ARAVINDA

¶40

S/O. LATE T.R.RAJAN, NO.498/1, SHILPA, OPP. TO PRABHA EYE CLINIC, 40^TH CROSS, 8^TH BLOCK, JNANANAGAR, BANGALORE.

¶41

...RESPONDENTS

¶42

(BY SRI. SHANTHARAJ.K., ADVOCATE FOR R1)

¶43

THIS MFA FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED. 15.04.2019, PASSED IN MVC NO.6862/2016, ON THE FILE OF THE IIIADDITIONAL JUDGE AND MACT, BENGALURU (SCCH-18), AWARDING COMPENSATION OF RS.15,67,800/WITH INTEREST AT 8 PERCENT P.A., FROM THE DATE OF PETITION TILL THE DATE OF DEPOSIT.

¶44

THESE APPEALS, COMING ON FOR HEARINGINTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶45

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH

¶46

& HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE TARA VITASTA GANJU

¶47

4 -

¶48

NC: 2025:KHC:46805-DB MFA No. 1149 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6684 of 2019

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶51

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

¶52

These two appeals, one filed by the claimant and the other by the Insurance Company, impugned the common Judgment and Award dated 15.04.2019 passed by the Court of the III Additional Judge and MACT, Bengaluru, in MVC No. 6862/2016.

¶53

The claimant, a 23-year-old young man, met with an accident on 02.08.2016 at about 04.00 P.M. while riding a motorcycle bearing registration No.KA-41-X-1565 on Nagarabhavi Ring Road. He was hit by a tractor bearing registration No. KA-05-AB-6170. The Tribunal, after considering the medical evidence, assessed the functional disability at 60% but adopted a notional income of only Rs. 6,000/-, despite the accident having occurred in the year 2016. Furthermore, the Tribunal did not award any amount towards future prospects to the

¶54

claimant/appellant. The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is as under:

¶55

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:46805-DB MFA No. 1149 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6684 of 2019

¶56

HC-KAR

¶57

Compensation heads	Compensation Amount
1. Towards loss of future income	Rs. 7,77,600/-
2. Toward pain and suffering	Rs. 1,50,000/-
3. Towards attendant, Nourishment and conveyance charges	Rs. 1,00,000/-
4. Towards loss of amenities	Rs. 1,50,000/-
5. Towards medical expenses	Rs. 1,90,200/-
6. Towards future medication	Rs. 2,00,000/-
Total	Rs.15,67,800/-

¶58

Sri.Shantaraj, learned Senior Counsel appearing

¶59

for the appellant/claimant, submits that the claimant was working as an Electrical Mechanic, earning about Rs. 25,000/- per month. He contends that the Tribunal adopted an unduly low notional income of Rs. 6,000/-, which is not in line with the chart issued by the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority for accident of the year 2016 where no proof of income is furnished. According to his submission, in the absence of proof, the notional income should have been at least Rs. 9,500/- per month. He further submits that considering the nature of the

¶60

6 -

¶61

NC: 2025:KHC:46805-DB MFA No. 1149 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6684 of 2019

¶62

HC-KAR

¶63

disability, the Tribunal ought to have granted future prospects at 40%, which it failed to do.

¶64

On the other hand, Sri.D.Vijaykumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent in MFA No. 1149/2021 (the appellant in the connected appeal), submits that the doctor who treated the claimant in his cross-examination, did not depose specifically on the claimant's functional disability, yet the Tribunal assessed it at 60%. He contends that the compensation awarded under other heads is exorbitant and the interest rate of 8% per annum is on the higher side. He, therefore, prays for a modification of the award to that extent.

¶65

We have considered the rival submissions. The medical evidence indicates that the claimant suffered 25% locomotor disability, 50% neuropsychological impairment, and 73.5% whole-body neurocognitive impairment. The Tribunal rightly noted that the claimant suffered a severe head injury resulting in a permanent disability of 60%, requiring assistance for daily activities.

¶66

7 -

¶67

NC: 2025:KHC:46805-DB MFA No. 1149 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6684 of 2019

¶68

HC-KAR

¶69

Considering the evidence of PW3, (the doctor) and the overall circumstances, we find the Tribunal's assessment of 60% functional disability to be proper and justified, requiring no interference.

¶70

Regarding the notional income, however, the Tribunal's adoption of Rs. 6,000/- per month is not sustainable. As per the Karnataka State Legal Services Authority guidelines applicable for accidents in 2016, the notional income in the absence of proof should be Rs.9,500/- per month. This deserves to be corrected. It is also well-settled that the claimant is entitled to future prospects, which the Tribunal erroneously denied.

¶71

We have considered Sri.D.Vijaykumar, learned counsel’s submissions regarding the other heads of compensation, namely, pain and suffering, attendant/nourishment/conveyance charges, loss of amenities, medical expenses, and future medication. We are of the opinion that the compensation awarded under

¶72

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:46805-DB MFA No. 1149 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6684 of 2019

¶73

HC-KAR

¶74

these heads by the Tribunal is just and reasonable and does not an warrant interference.

¶75

Concerning the rate of interest, the Tribunal awarded 8% per annum from the date of the petition till realization. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the provisions of Section 34 of the CPC, we deem it appropriate to reduce the rate of interest from 8% to 6% per annum.

¶76

Accordingly, the compensation payable is re-

¶77

determined as follows:

¶78

1.	Towards loss of income and future prospects 9,500X12X60%X18+40%=Rs.1 7,23,680/-	Rs.	17,23,680/-
2.	Towards pain and suffering	Rs.	1,50,000/-
3.	Towards conveyance and attendants charges	Rs.	1,00,000/-
4.	Towards loss of amenities	Rs.	1,50,000/-
5.	Towards medical expenses	Rs.	1,90,200/-
6.	Towards future medical expenses	Rs.	2,00,000/-
	TOTAL	Rs	25,13,880/

¶79

9 -

¶80

NC: 2025:KHC:46805-DB MFA No. 1149 of 2021 C/W MFA No. 6684 of 2019

¶81

HC-KAR

¶82

In all the appellant is entitled for a

¶83

compensation of Rs.25,13,880/- along with 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization as against the compensation of Rs.15,67,800/- awarded by the Tribunal. Hence, the appellant – claimant is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.9,46,080/-

¶84

(Rs.25,13,880-15,67,800) along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization except interest an Rs.2,00,000/- the future medical expenses.

¶85