Shri Nagesh G Vs Shri K.L.Nagendra

DECREE DATED 17.06.2015 PASSED IN MVC NO. 2705/2015 ON THE FILE OF THE MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, COURT OF SMALL CAUSES, BANGALORE SCCH-24; b) ENHANCE THE COMPENSATION AS CLAIMED IN THE CLAIM PETITION WITH COST AND ALSO SUCH OTHER ORDER/S AND RELIEF THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT TO GRANT IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.M.NADAF

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

This appeal is filed by the appellant/claimant seeking for enhancement of compensation arising out of judgment and award dated 17.06.2015 in MVC No. 2705/2012 passed by the XXII Additional Small Causes Judge & Member MACT at Bengaluru (SCCH-24) (for short ‘Tribunal’) on the ground of quantum of compensation.

¶27

The date of accident, involvement of vehicle, injuries sustained as well as liability to pay the compensation are not in dispute. The only dispute is with regard to quantum of compensation.

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:40018 MFA No. 7553 of 2015

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

Heard Sri.Mohan S. Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri.K.Suresh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 – Insurance Company. Vide order dated 02.07.2021, notice to respondent No.1 is dismissed.

¶31

Sri.Mohan S. Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant with all vehemence submitted that the Tribunal has failed to consider the case of the appellant/injured and has awarded meager compensation without considering the injuries suffered by the claimant and requires enhancement. Accordingly, sought to allow the appeal.

¶32

Refuting the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, Sri.K.Suresh, learned counsel with all vehemence submitted that appellant has submitted only Ex.P.11 - OPD slip issued by St.Johns Medical College Hospital, Bengaluru which is not a wound certificate. He submits that the compensation awarded by the Tribunal is just and proper and does not calls for any interference at

¶33

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:40018 MFA No. 7553 of 2015

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

the hands of this Court. Accordingly, sought to dismiss

¶36

the appeal.

¶37

Having heard the learned counsel appearing for both the parties, perused the entire appeal papers as well as trial Court record.

¶38

The only point that would arise for consideration

¶39

is:-

¶40

“Whether compensation awarded by the Tribunal in the facts and circumstances of the case, taking note of the year of accident, is just and proper within the meaning of ‘just compensation’?”

¶41

My answer to the above point for consideration is partly ‘in the affirmative’ for the following reasons:-

¶42

It is not in dispute that the appellant has suffered closed fracture tibia and liver contusion as per Ex.P.11 – OPD slip. The appellant has not produced wound certificate but OPD slip and is not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent No.2. Considering the peculiar

¶43

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:40018 MFA No. 7553 of 2015

¶44

HC-KAR

¶45

facts and circumstances of the case, instead of awarding compensation under each heads, awarding compensation globally will be just and proper. Hence, another sum of Rs.25,000/- is awarded globally, which would meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, global compensation of Rs.25,000/- is awarded along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of petition till realization. Respondent No.2 – Insurance Company shall deposit entire global compensation stated supra before the concerned Tribunal within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶46

Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:-

¶47

ORDER

¶48

i. The appeal is allowed in-part .

¶49

ii. The appellant is entitled for a global compensation of another sum of Rs.25,000/additionally with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date petition till realization.

¶50

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:40018 MFA No. 7553 of 2015

¶51

HC-KAR

¶52

iii. The respondent No.2 – Insurance Company

¶53

shall deposit the enhanced global compensation stated supra within six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order before the concerned Tribunal.

¶54

iv. Upon deposit, entire amount shall be released in favour of appellant on proper identification.

¶55

v. Registry is directed to transmit the TCR along with copy of this order to the Tribunal forthwith.

¶56

vi. No order as to costs.

¶57

Sd/(T.M.NADAF) JUDGE

¶58

MH/-

¶59

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 9

Shri Nagesh G v. Shri K.L.Nagendra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Nagesh G v. Shri K.L.Nagendra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahanthaswamy R Virakthamath Vs Superintending Engineer

Sri Amasidda @ Amogsiddha Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri. Narayanrao v Kulkarni Vs the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax

Sri. P. Ramesha Vs M. Mujeeb Ali

Dayananda Naik Vs Sri Akshay

The Divisional Manager Vs Harshitha