Mr Sundara Poojary Vs National Insurance Company Ltd.

MR SUNDARA POOJARY S/O DEKAYYA POOJARY, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, R/AT KEPULAGUDDE HOUSE, KUKKIPADI VILALGE, MAVINAKATTE POST, BANTWAL TALUK, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT VINAYAKA COMPOUND, KAILBATTLU, KADRI, MANGALORE

¶12

…APPELLANT

¶13

(BY SRI.GURUPRASAD B.R.,ADVOCATE)

¶14

AND:

¶15

Digitally signed by PADMASHREE SHEKHAR DESAI Location: High Court Of Karnatka

¶16

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD 1ST FLOOR, ABOVE GANESH BAZAR BUILDING, GHS ROAD, MANGALORE-575001 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER

¶17

MR. SURESH R POOJARY S/O RAMANNA POOJ ARY, ADULT, R/AT BASTIKODI HOUSE, VAMADAPADAV POST, BANTWAL TALUK-574211.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:32085 MFA No. 8865 of 2015

¶20

HC-KAR

¶21

(BY SMT S.SUJATHA PANDIT, ADVOCATE FOR SRI K. SRIDHAR ADVOCATE FOR R1)

¶22

MFA FILED U/S 173(1) OF MV ACT AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND AWARD DATED01.12.2014 PASSED IN MVC NO.1596/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND MEMBER, MACT, AT MANGALORE, PARTLY ALLOWING THE CLAIM PETITION FOR COMPENSATION AND SEEKING ENHANCEMENT OF COMPENSATION.

¶23

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

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE P SREE SUDHA

¶25

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶26

This appeal under Section 173(1) of the M.V. Act arises from the judgment and award dated 1.12.2014, passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge & Member, MACT, at Mangalore in MVC No.1596/2013.

¶27

The appellant/claimant, who sustained injuries in a road traffic accident on 25.06.2013, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1989, seeking compensation amount of Rs.12,00,000/-. The Tribunal after considering the entire evidence on record awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,75,400/- with interest at the rate of 6%

¶28

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:32085 MFA No. 8865 of 2015

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

p.a. Being aggrieved with the quantum of compensation, the claimant is before this Court.

¶31

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the respondent - Insurance Company and perused the records.

¶32

It is contended that the claimant sustained five grievous injuries and was hospitalized for a period of 13 days. The amount granted under the head pain and suffering is on lower side. Though he incurred Rs.1,00,000/- for medical expenses, only Rs.35,000/- is awarded by the Tribunal. P.W.2Doctor stated that the claimant requires Rs.50,000/- for future medical expenses for bone grafting surgery, but the Tribunal has granted only Rs.20,000/- towards future medical expenses. Rs.10,000/- is awarded towards Conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges which is on lower side. It is further contended that, claimant was welder and was earning Rs.10,500/- per month, but the Tribunal has considered only Rs.6,000/- per month. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.10,000/towards loss of amenities which is on lower side. The Tribunal has awarded Rs.1,22,400/- towards loss of earning due to

¶33

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:32085 MFA No. 8865 of 2015

¶34

HC-KAR

¶35

disability which is also on lower side. Therefore, he sought for enhancement of compensation.

¶36

The claimant having sustained injuries in a road traffic accident is not disputed. The accident occurred in the year 2013 and the claimant was aged 30 years at the time of the accident. In the absence of proof of income, the notional income is assessed at Rs.8,000/- per month, according to the chart prepared by the Karnataka Legal Services Authority, as opposed to Rs.6,000/- assessed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal has rightly assessed the disability at 10% and the calculation comes to Rs.8,000 X 12 X 17 X10%= Rs. 1,63,200/- towards loss of future earning capacity due to disability.

¶37

Considering the nature of the injury sustained by the claimant, the Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 60,000/- towards pain and suffering is deemed sufficient and therefore no interference is called for.

¶38

Considering the nature of injury sustained by the

¶39

claimant, disability stated by the doctor and an amount of discomfort and unhappiness the claimant has to undergo in his

¶40

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:32085 MFA No. 8865 of 2015

¶41

HC-KAR

¶42

future life, a sum of Rs.30,000/- is awarded as opposed to Rs.10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal towards loss of amenities.

¶43

The nature of injuries suggest that he must have

¶44

been under rest and treatment for a period of 5 months and therefore a sum of Rs.40,000/- is awarded towards ‘loss of income during laid up period’ as opposed to Rs.18,000/awarded by the Tribunal.

¶45

P.W.3-Doctor clearly stated that the claimant requires Rs.50,000/- towards " future medical expenses, and the same is awarded under the head as opposed to Rs.20,000/awarded by the Tribunal.

¶46

The claimant was treated as inpatient for a period 13 days. Therefore, considering the duration of treatment, a sum of Rs.30,000/- is awarded towards incidental expenses such as conveyance, nourishment and attendant charges as opposed to Rs. 10,000/- awarded by the Tribunal.

¶47

The compensation awarded by the Tribunal is reassessed as follows;

¶48

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:32085 MFA No. 8865 of 2015

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

Pain and Suffering	:	Rs.	60,000/-
Loss of future income	:	Rs.	1,63,200/-
8,000 X 12 X 17 X10%=
Medical Expenses	:	Rs.	35,000/-
Loss of Amenities	:	Rs.	30,000/-
Food and nourishment, conveyance And attendant charges)		Rs.	30,000/-
Loss of income during laid up period	:	Rs.	40,000/-
Future medical expenses	:	Rs.	50,000/-
TOTAL	:	Rs.	4,08,200/-

¶51

Therefore, the appellant is awarded a total compensation of Rs.4,08,200/as opposed to the

¶52

compensation awarded by the Tribunal at Rs.2,75,400 The appellant is entitled for an enhanced compensation of Rs.1,32,800/-, along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till its actual realization.

¶53

Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶54

ORDER

¶55

i. The appeal is allowed in part .

¶56

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:32085 MFA No. 8865 of 2015

¶57

HC-KAR

¶58

ii. The appellant – claimant is entitled for an additional compensation of Rs.1,32,800/-, along with interest at 6% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till deposit in addition to what has been awarded by the Tribunal.

¶59

iii. The enhanced compensation amount with accrued interest is to be released in favour of the claimant by the respondent - Insurance Company within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order.

¶60

To this extent, the judgment and award stands modified.

¶61

Draw the award accordingly.

¶62

SD/(P SREE SUDHA) JUDGE

¶63

HR

Mr Sundara Poojary v. National Insurance Company Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Sundara Poojary v. National Insurance Company Ltd.

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

Rangegowda Vs Shankarnagu

Pandu Vs Kum Veena

Sri Mahaboob Pasha Vs K S Adinarayana Swamy

Smt Sundari Vs Mr K Chandraprakash Shetty

Sri Siddesh Gupta K Vs M/S National Insurance

Smt.Lalitha Vs Mr. Lancy Montero