Sri Vinod H L Vs Sri Shivakumar S

SRI SHIVAKUMAR S S/O SWAMY, R/AT NO.21 GROUND FLOOR RAMAIAH BUILDING, 10^TH C MAIN, 2^ND CROSS JAYANAGAR, 1^ST STAGE, BENGALURU-560 011. (OWNER OF MOTOR CYCLE BEARING NO.KA-05-JZ-1432)

¶19

THE DIVISIONAL MANAGER NEW INDIA INSURANCE CO., LTD., T P HUB J L B ROAD, CHAMUNDIPURAM MYSURU PIN-570004

¶20

…RESPONDENTS (VIDE ORDER DATED:10.08.2022, NOTICE TO R-1 IS DISPENSED WITH; BY SRI. JANARDHAN REDDY., ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶21

2 -

¶22

NC: 2025:KHC:31723-DB MFA No. 1275 of 2022

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

THIS MFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED 15.06.2021 PASSED IN MVC NO. 1548/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MADDUR, MANDYA DISTRICT IN CONCURRENT AND ITINERARY CHARGE OF COURT OF SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MACT, MALAVALLI, MANDYA DISTRICT, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶25

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

¶26

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH and

¶27

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T

¶28

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶29

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VENKATESH NAIK T)

¶30

Heard learned counsels for the appellant and

¶31

respondents.

¶32

The appellant - claimant has filed this appeal for enhancement of compensation being aggrieved by the judgment and award passed by the Senior Civil Judge & MACT, Malavalli (for short, Tribunal) in MVC.No.1548/2018 dated 15.06.2021.

¶33

For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their rankings before the Tribunal.

¶34

3 -

¶35

NC: 2025:KHC:31723-DB MFA No. 1275 of 2022

¶36

HC-KAR

¶37

Brief facts of the case are that, on 29.01.2018 at about

¶38

5.30 am, near Kyathegowdanadoddi village on MalavalliKanakapura main road, the appellant - claimant while proceeding from Koregala village to Bengaluru on motor cycle bearing Reg.No.KA-05 JZ-1432, as a pillion rider which was ridden by one Chiranjeevi K.N., in a rash and negligent manner collided against a bullock-cart. As a result, the appellant - claimant fell down and sustained grievous injuries. He was immediately shifted to the Government Hospital, Malavalli for first aid and then to JSS Hospital for further treatment, where he has taken surgical treatment as an inpatient. He has also taken treatment at Victoria Hospital, Bengaluru.

¶39

Learned counsel Sri Ravisha M.G for the appellant - claimant contended that, the Tribunal has committed an error in awarding less compensation. The Tribunal has considered the notional income of the appellant at Rs.12,500/ which is on lower side, as the appellant -

¶40

4 -

¶41

NC: 2025:KHC:31723-DB MFA No. 1275 of 2022

¶42

HC-KAR

¶43

claimant was an agriculturist and also was working as a Cab Driver and was earning Rs.30,000/- per month.

¶44

Further, the Tribunal has not considered the disability

¶45

as the appellant sustained grievous injuries due to the accident his left kidney, spleen, part of pancreas and part of large intestine have been removed. A bag has been fixed to his stomach for passing of stools to it through the small intestine. Hence, he prayed to allow the appeal.

¶46

Per contra, learned counsel Sri Janardhan Reddy for the Insurance Company vehemently contended that, the Tribunal considering the oral and documentary evidence on record has granted fair and reasonable compensation. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of the appeal.

¶47

We have perused the material available on record. Having heard the learned counsels for both the parties, the point that would arise for our consideration in the appeal is:

¶48

Whether the quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and

¶49

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:31723-DB MFA No. 1275 of 2022

¶50

HC-KAR

¶51

reasonable or does it call for enhancement?

¶52

To prove the claim of the appellant, he himself got examined as PW.1 and he also got examined Dr. Madhu C.P. as CW.1 and got marked documents as per Ex.P-1 to Ex.P271 and two Case-sheets as per Ex.C-1 and Ex.C-2.

¶53

As per Ex.P-4 - the Wound Certificate, it appears that the claimant has suffered following injuries:

¶54

C/o pain in abdomen tenderness present over left side of abdomen,

¶55

Crush injury left little toe,

¶56

Tenderness over left forearm,

¶57

Abrasion over left knee,

¶58

Cut injury left little finger as stated in detail therein.

¶59

To substantiate the claim of the appellant, the claimant examined the doctor as CW-1 who treated him. However, the appellant has not furnished any disability certificate.

¶60

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:31723-DB MFA No. 1275 of 2022

¶61

HC-KAR

¶62

Sofaras the income of the claimant is concerned, the Tribunal had considered the notional income of the deceased at Rs.12,500/- per month.

¶63

We have perused the IA filed under Order XLI Rule 27

¶64

read with Section 151 of CPC, for production of the copy of DL, RC, Permit and Insurance Policy and bank statement of the claimant, to substantiate that the claimant was earning Rs.18,000/per month regularly. Hence, we have considered the income of the claimant at Rs.18,000/- per month.

¶65

Though no disability certificate is furnished, however, taking into consideration the nature of the injuries sustained by the appellant and the fact that, his left kidney, spleen, part of pancreas and part of large intestine have been removed. A bag has been fixed to his stomach for passing of stools to it through the small intestine. However, no specific percentage of physical disability has been deposed by the doctor for the purpose of assessing whether there will be any loss of earning capacity or not, in our considered opinion, it

¶66

7 -

¶67

NC: 2025:KHC:31723-DB MFA No. 1275 of 2022

¶68

HC-KAR

¶69

is just and necessary to assess the permanent physical disability at 20%.

¶70

The claimant was aged about 22 years at the time of accident. As per the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of SMT. SARLA VERMA AND OTHERS. Vs.

¶71

DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION AND

¶72

ANOTHER reported in AIR 2009 SC 3104 , the multiplier applicable to the age of the deceased is '18'. Thus, the compensation under the loss of future earning capacity is reassessed as under:

¶73

Rs.18,000 + Rs.7,200 (40%) = Rs.25,200/-

¶74

Rs.25,200 x 12 x 18 x 20% = Rs.10,88,640/-

¶75

The Tribunal has granted a sum of Rs.5,86,608/-

¶76

towards medical expenses which is fair and reasonable. Hence, the same is maintained.

¶77

Further, the Tribunal has granted a sum of Rs.65,000/- towards food and nourishment and

¶78

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:31723-DB MFA No. 1275 of 2022

¶79

HC-KAR

¶80

miscellaneous expenses, which is fair and reasonable. Hence, the same is maintained.

¶81

Further, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,05,000/- towards loss of income during the laid up period which is on lower side. Considering the income of the claimant at Rs.18,000/- for future prospects, the same is to be enhanced to Rs.1,51,000/-.

¶82

Further, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- towards pain and sufferings and

¶83

Rs.2,00,000/- towards loss of amenities which are fair and reasonable. Hence, the same are maintained and no interference is called for in that regard.

¶84

Thus, the claimant is entitled for the following compensation:

¶85

HEADS	Rs.
Medical Expenses	5,86,608.00
Food, nourishment and miscellaneous expenses	65,000.00
Loss of income during laid up period	1,51,000.00
Pain and suffering	1,50,000.00
Loss of amenities	2,00,000.00

¶86

9 -

¶87

NC: 2025:KHC:31723-DB MFA No. 1275 of 2022

¶88

HC-KAR

¶89

Loss of future income due to disability	10,88,640.00
TOTAL	22,41,248.00
Less :Compensation awarded by the Tribunal	11,06,608.00
ENHANCED COMPENSATION	11,34,640.00

¶90

Accordingly, we pass the following

¶91

O R D E R

¶92

i. The appeal is allowed-in-part .

¶93

ii. The judgment and award dated 15.06.2021 in MVC No.1548/2018 passed by the Senior Civil Judge and MACT, Malavalli, is modified to the extent stated hereinabove.

¶94

iii. The claimant is entitled for total compensation of Rs.22,41,248/- (Rupees Twenty two lakh forty one thousand two hundred and forty eight only) as against Rs.11,06,608/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶95